"it is not worse all the time" - Actually, it is. Their jpg engine plus auto functionality makes them great for the smartphone set and their ergonomics with analog-like dials appeals to the old-school enthusiasts. Now, I see no reason (other than manufacturer's greed and customer's ignorance) why crop toys cost so much. This camera should have been released in 2016 and named X-T2. The tech in Sony cameras moves forward faster than most peoples opinions - heat's no longer an issue due to the new LSI being much more powerful/efficient (not an issue on my A992 & A7R3). Why would I want to deal with a company that doesn't respect its customers? In short, the AF system on the X-H1 is more than sufficient for most photography needs, including mine. Honestly, talking about high quality at high ISOs is really funny. So, basically, when the amount of light isn't the same, DoF is different too. But when Fuji asks $600 for the same thing, which is 3 times the Sony price, then yes, it is very much overpriced. Interestingly, although rated at 5EV, Fujifilm says the stabilization can hit 5.5EV of effectiveness if paired with non-IS lenses. That's how it works. All the major manufacturers offer high-quality tools for making top-level photos. The Sony A7/9 series obviously have excellent sensors but ergonomically they're a bit of a pain to handle. But with the X lenses I have now, and considering the differences between FF and Crop didn't mean much to me, the X-H1's IBIS and improved handling makes me one happy Fuji user. Even if I'd ignore all of the flaws and shortcomings, like AF, or battery life, etc ... still, APS-C quality at $1900 (specially xTrans) isn't on my shopping list. - at some point you're going to have to proof that with actual pictures.And again you're using strict equivalence to make your point, I'll call it theory, without at any point considering what a system can actually deliver. Auto Rotate Displays is ON, but it doesn't have any effect. If I compare two lenses on different sensors, 16-35mm FF and 10-24mm APS-C with the same aperture. The X-H1 has a new option, Eterna, which is modeled after Fujifilm's motion picture stock. Yes, a Sony FF A9 or A7** would be smaller -- but won't feel this solid. The larger one shows the whole frame, while the smaller one shows a zoomed area where the focus point is. So, please, learn the equivalence principle and stop the BS. The body/booster grip combo price is very near $1200 USD. You said it well, it's all about money and whether or not someone would put the cash on the table for the extra stop, extra resolution, extra weight. I don't care if it is ISO 1bn as long as two pictures from different cameras look the same. But I'm not going to invest $3000 ... $4000 ... $5000 into such system, because it doesn't deliver an adequate image quality for the price. At home I'm using the Sony A7 II or now the D800. But, people are deceiving themselves by mindlessly comparing things at 1:1. We all know that these x series cameras are absolutely professional grade, as do our clients. If the competition is fierce, sell as much as possible. No one outside of paid sponsors are going to convert to Fuji for their professional video work. The buttons are hard to tricky to access etc. For now, as a 6'5" dude with big hands, I deeply appreciate having this option in size. That FE glass is nooooot cheap. it doesn't say anything really. But I don't understand for the life of me why this is a bad thing? In this buying guide we’ve rounded up all the current interchangeable lens cameras costing less than $1500 and … Even if it's a 3-axis stabilization, or up to 2-3 stops as compared with 5.5, it's still more than good enough for most of us. Technical Editor Richard Butler's pick was the unusual lens that gave him the opportunity to try something new. I'll still keep it even if I decide to buy XH1. Fuji's now really needs a X-H2 with equal or greater feature set than the X-T3. I am now fully convinced that the X-H1 is not for me. I'm afraid that the notion of "good enough" and the notion of "I don't care" both are one and the same notion. There are cheaper 1" super-zooms like Panasonic FZ2000/FZ2500 or Canon G3X, but they are not on the same level with Sony RX10'IV.About Apple. So pour a tall cold one and get ready to treat yourself, 2020 style. Didn't say there was an issue with the sharpness on FF shot, I just noticed the dust on the red collar that is in focus was more visible on the APS-C side, for instance. DoF is just a side effect, no need to put money there. I really don't need a third, though I know some people like it. :)If it sells like hot cakes, then why not make it more expensive next time? Why would I ever pick the $1300 MFT 40-150F2.8 over $500-$1000 FF 70-300F3.5-5.6? If you switch to Single or Continuous AF, toggling the “DISP” button will not show this mode. the f-stop difference I have inflicted on the FF is making the scene darker (and I should have used f8.4 to match the APS-C f5.6, if it had been possible). Now, three months later, the company has confirmed in a statement that the personal information of past and current employees was taken from its servers. Yep. Image quality. Nikon makes a 300 mm f/4 P lens that costs over $2K and Canon offers one 400 mm f/4 DO IS that costs $6K. You can't really tell what number relates to what EV. In this buying guide we’ve rounded up all the current interchangeable lens cameras costing around $2000 and recommended the best. According to the company, FUJIFILM’s X-T3 firmware update v4.00 will now bring similar autofocus performance as with the X-T4, thanks to a new algorithm. Some say that there's bad sample variation, but those images looked almost as sharp as Foveon (another APS-C that I could use). Some will think superb means scoring highest MTF values in reviews, they rely on numbers and fact, they don't lie. So, there is no extra DR in Fuji. I know that Canon color science has changed but white balance is only an issue in JPEG and video. OK, I know that's been debated...back to the X-H1. What about "meh" or "so-so"? Whether that is enough to sway them to an "only APSC" LOL is subjective and debatable. It's like there are no individual pixels in MFT pictures at all. Photokina has announced via a press release that after 70 years of shows in Cologne, Germany, it will be indefinitely suspended due to 'decreases in the imaging market’ that have ‘force[d] a hard cut.’. Why do you believe that crops improved a lot and FF did not? And you can't apply it for just one thing (like focal length) while ignoring the rest.56F1.2 on crop is not equal to FF 85F1.2, because it is equal to FF 85F1.8.56F1.2 ISO400 on crop is not equal to FF 85F1.2 ISO400, because it is equal to FF 85F1.8 ISO1000. same goes for Canikon as well.Finally a blind test with two shots made with equivalent aperture, base iso, 6s exposure:https://s20.postimg.cc/o3jgvs8q5/DSC06361.jpghttps://s20.postimg.cc/qxmm98im5/DSC07400.jpgCan you tell which is FF and why? X-H1 does everything that X-T2 can but also delivers lot's of new in terms of video. They require a tripod or something to put your camera on or a flash, so you could shoot with 100% hit rate. I can't be the only person who appreciates having a bigger, more grippy Fuji camera on the market, am I? That is why Fuji does what it does. No. Each system is a spectrum of things, only FF one is wider, and it covers the APS-C almost entirely (with some minor exceptions like a few hundred grams lighter body). Any advise appreciated. All looks so good, however the price tag comes in close to where we can get a FF like Pentax K-1 or the Sony A7iii... sure many better options in les than half that price for crop sensor! The X-H1 succeeds brilliantly on its own terms. Equivalence makes them both the same. On top of this comes the ability for the camera to retain a raft of settings separately for stills and video. I admit my first encounter with MFT was difficult. I guess we just see things differently, regardless of the difference. However, if you use their smaller bodies, primes, and zooms there is an advantage to mirrorless APSC. Fuji was good enough to make lenses for Hasselblad, and I'd gather that counts for a bit more than a personal opinion. The new Fuji cameras have: - higher resolution- better ISO performance- higher dynamic range. Mount a FF 50mm F1.8 on a FF camera and an APS-C camera and, from the same position, you get all the edges cropped off on the APS-C camera, which is useless. "why should I care as long as the end result is the same" - That's the thing, it's not the same. If it's not a value proposition for you at that price, there are lots of other $2000 options available to you, including a M4/3 camera that costs $100 more. exactly, why should I care as long as the end result is the same, the picture is not underexposed? ....with a fully articulated screen it would take my money too. GR looks so much better. What’s the best camera for less than $1000? Thank you for this review. For instance take the Fuji 10-24 f4, should it really be f2.8 to match the FE 16-35 f4 ??? Sony's GM glass has been oversized, overpriced and generally underwhelming. Fuji need better good sensor. Maybe Sigma could ...Of course it is possible to produce some good enough pictures with crop cameras. I really don't care about fancy F-numbers or "pro" designations on overpriced toys.A7III made progress, while (possibly) APS-C image quality may never fully surpass the original A7 or even the original 5D. Fuji underexposes by 2/3 stop, which is why everyone thinks Fuji cheats ISO. Its weight is pretty comparable to the larger APS-C and MFT bodies, too. if I shoot my FF with f/4.2 the scene is darker than the same one shot at f/2.8 on APS-C. To be honest, appart from the sharpness of the lens itself, I don't see much advantage to take my A7 II + 16-35mm f4 over my Fuji X-T20 + 10-24mm f4. It's not about converters. If something stands in the way of getting a better image, then it's wrong. I know the theory of that one stop advantage. I like Fuji OOC colors but the price is beyond absurd. There are only compromises that can make things smaller, for any system. 100mp FF image down-sampled to 24mp would contain much more data than the native 24mp crop image. "ISO-equivalence, I don't think it exists" - It's not a matter of opinion. But is it only the sensor that is at fault or also lenses that were not designed with such a density in mind?I remember taking the Ricoh GR to Barcelona and later noticed how good the pictures were, especially in terms of sharpness and distortion. I am reading it ... but it doesn't make any sense. Sample Images Intro Grip Specs Performance Compared User's Guide Recommendations More Fujifilm X-H1 (23.8 oz./674g with battery and card, $999 new or about $850 used if you know How to Win at eBay) and Fujifilm 16mm f/2.8. @MarksphotoI have tested systems from the 4 big players (Fuji X-T2, Canon 5D4, Nikon D850, Sony A7R3) for at least 2 weeks and up to a year depending on the model. You really pigeonhole/hamstring yourself by arbitrarily eliminating the best choices... Is the new procedure on camera reviewing like: If it has good dynamic range, give that its own page and measure it. When on city breaks the Fuji 10-24mm + 16mm 1.4 works well for me. and after all the hype XH-1 sell badly and has been heavily discounted.True Fuji success.... Let's also see how well they'll support this camera with firmware updates. It's a hell of a lot more compact for the same range. Unless you already have a few Fuji lenses, I believe most people will choose Sony A7-3. And one full stop is a lot. Same size, same weight, same production costs. Yep they're pretty small. XF10-24F4=$1000 | FE16-35F6.1 (doesn't exist, but there is $1250 F4 version equivalent to XF10-24F2.5)XF16-55F2.8=$1200 | FE24-70F4=$1100 (which is equivalent to 16-55F2.5) and FE24-105F4=$1300 (which is equivalent to XF16-70F2.5)XF50-140F2.8=$1600 | FE70-200F4=$1400 (which is equivalent to XF50-140F2.5)and so on ...And you can check the size and weight, there is no advantage in crop optics. Have a look. Awful choice to promote mirrorless. Moreover, in Germany, Fuji already offers some discounts.. Sorry for the bad FoV equivalence. It's not that it doesn't bother me, it is just that it is not worse all the time, so when I can use the benefits of lighter gear with excellent performance wide open I'm not really concerned my shots could have been so much better with a FF camera.Whenever I buy a lens for any system I test it against my other systems with lenses covering the same focal length. But it's not good enough for everything and everyone. Lumix 84% gets GOLD...Fujifilm 86% gets SILVER. Why don't you put two cameras (Fuji vs something) side by side and try getting the same exposure values with the same settings. It's a win-win situation. When we first reported on the alleged ransomware attack back in August, Canon said it was 'investigating the situation.' They are selling BS, just like Fuji. You can adjust every mid to high-end camera to do this in-camera and I personally prefer this route as opposed to allowing a camera to dictate my color choices through suggestion. The only problem with FF is that there are no super tiny and cheap (F8/F11) crop-equivalent optics, yet. But, what about making a FF setup to match the APS-C "look"? Repeating the same old BS endlessly won't make it true.FF sensor doesn't come with heavy lenses. @ Richard Butler and Dan Bracaglia Great review overall, thanks a lot! In other cases I couldn't see much difference, at least not in sharpness. thats true the d500 isn't as compelling a camera, and is large and unweildy as dslrs tend to be. The FUJIFILM X-H1 boasts autofocus performance with enhanced capability to track a moving subject. So X-H1 may be better for some... out of the pure specs, Specs-wise, the Sony looks great, but I read that the IBIS isn't that impressive. And once you add that into the mix you're looking at a large fortune already. It's based around the same 24MP sensor as the X-T2 but adds in-body image stabilization as well as a more comprehensive set of video options. But I'm afraid that the F4 lens isn't exactly F4 either (could be F3.88 or F4.07 or whatever) and even 16-35mm is only an approximation. It's based around the same 24MP sensor as the X-T2 but adds in-body image stabilization as well as a more comprehensive set of video options. Body is bigger than before, but lot sturdier, and not bulky like a FF DSLR. The Sigma 65mm F2 DG DN is for the photographer who wants a focal length that falls squarely between 50mm and 85mm. However, Canon and Nikon employed is diffractive optics that reduce the size and weight, but at the expense of cost! CIPA's latest report for global camera shipments shows the camera industry is gaining pace once again in a year marred by the COVID-19 pandemic atop a market already in decline. You shouldn't expect similar results from half the amount of light.Yes, I could live with roughly one stop of estimated difference, there's no 100% precision in those things anyways. Cannot afford it.2. Why is that XF 35F1.4 equivalent FF lens costs $100-$200 and not $600 like the Fuji? At least the price went down (as predicted) and now it's only $1600 with $340 worth of free stuff on B&H. It's physics, no way around it. Maybe it wasn't really possible to make those for the DSLR, but for mirrorless the only issue is greed. Is it even possible to turn off Fuji's destructive noise reduction on RAW files?What early RAW converters? So, yeah it's not going to sell very well. Sony managed to pull it off with their a6500, and even the full frame A7II is smaller and lighter than the X-H1. Putting the most expensive crop lenses against the top FF lenses doesn't make them equal, not even close.There are no issues with FF sensors having pixel densities similar or lower than crops. "am I to understand that a FF 50mm 1.8 on a crop body should be brighter because there is more light coming through?" Exactly, so exposure is the same. He owns a competing product.3. Once zoomed in, you can rotate the dial to zoom out and the joystick allows you to move around the image. No, F4.2 on FF does NOT put more light on sensor than on APS-C (looking at the same area). There you have it, Fuji. Absolutely silent mechanical shutter is worth $2000 without a camera attached to many photographers. I wonder if the xt3 will get the new sensor. - Total nonsense! FUJIFILM X-T3 Firmware Update v4.00. It's all about what works for you personally, not what a faceless reviewer says or what Joe Bloggs in the pub says. Only where FF will be clearly beneficial is that it will be 1-1.5 steps further usable on high ISOs than APS-C, and allow higher megapixel counts. Now that’s an insanely useful feature that sets these mirrorless cameras apart from DSLRs – using manual focus is now extremely handy, as you no longer have to think about focus errors. For no reason would they ever switch to a crappy (A)PC(-S) ! Sadly, because of the difference in processing power alone, the X-H1 could not receive any of the AF performance improvements the X-T3 got from firmware updates. Get them when their cheap now, before the XH-2 comes out at a higher price.No, never mind. For photographers who also need to shoot video, Fuji brings brilliant lenses for the price to an APSC mirrorless package, with good enough autofocus. Fujifilm X-H1 200Mbps Eterna Sample Reel by DPReview.com, Best Mid-Range Full Frame Mirrorless: Canon R6, Sony a7 III, Nikon Z6 II, Panasonic S5. Additionally, both face and eye detect have been enhanced and they are much more responsive and accurate on the X-T3 than on previous Fujifilm cameras. But again, Sony is doing the same when designing their products. Makes no sense. F1.2 can't be as good as F1.8 optically, but F1.8 on FF gets equivalently as much light as F1.2 on APS-C. Both will see the same view of the scene, if shot from the same location. Also, make your own standard so that people buy only into your products. Funny after all these years people are still repeating this "fake/cheat ISO" FUD.Probably intentionally. Switching these modes is as easy as moving the selector next to your lens. As I have already pointed out earlier, the X-H1 is the first Fuji mirrorless camera to feature In-Body Image Stabilization (IBIS) and as of early 2019, the only camera to have it. Donât look at the camera itself. i don't know about you, but most I know probably will take opticallimit's lens assessment over ecka84's. If anything, looking at the dust on the bottle that is in focus, it looks sharper on the A5100.Also exposure-wise, am I losing so much light on the APS-C camera ? Why do you think that A. A7s has only 12mpix ? I hope Nikon first FX toy mirrorless is the same size of the D850 with a lot of goodies to shoot with my 500G..Oh yes!! Their lenses are similar size as Canon and Nikon. These are facts, not fairy tales, facts. Since then they improved their IQ by a good margin, at least on par with average APS-C but to appeal to pros, they started making monstrous, expensive lenses. Unfortunately, not in your head.The light intensity = F (aperture)The amount of light = F * sensor area * timeThe exposure = F * sensitivity (ISO) * timeThe image brightness isn't quantifiable at all, because images can be manipulated. I thought the X-H1 images and especially the video looked great. This will narrow the 1.3EV gap in terms of the difference in total light they get. Nikon, Canon, Sony all offer single lens options that not only combine everything into 1 lens, they also arguably produce better IQ and often times are cheaper and lighter. I think $500 for "so-so" is a terrible scam and it should (at least) be "fine". I think itâs worth noting that, given the present pricing of $999(US) including the battery grip, the camera is worthy of a Platinum Award relative to the time it was released and the then Gold of the X-T2. I can't convince you if you made your own observation, only if you speak from theory. I said "over the aps-c sized part of FF. The Leica Q2 Monochrom is a version of the Gold Award-winning Q2 that only shoots images in black and white. I doubt anyone will buy the X-H1 now. Um no. I would not choose based on the fact they are APS-C or FF (both sensor are already more than good enough), but compare the whole system. Obviously great colour out of the box and silent shooting are not that important to you (and no electronic silent mode does not compare, it results in rolling shutter in photos with movement). "Finally, no, you're wrong, the FF50mm 1.8 on crop body will not crop anything, physically same hole, same light coming through." I have tried some 24-70F2.8, on both crop and FF. It doesn't hit the sensor at all. I think I've had arguments longer than this one trying to justify that f4 lens can be very sharp on FF and are reason enough to own that FF camera instead of buying the APS-C counterpart. Commenting that Fuji's colours "are just filters and only work with jpegs" illustrates ignorance on how important those baked in colours are for those who need to supply quality video to clients quickly, without enlisting the help of a professional video colourist. As you say, the BSI 1" chips did a good job of catching up with some of the sensors a size bigger. And speaking of exposure value, the other camera might just need to lower its ISO by half to get much less noise while still maintain the same ev as the Fuji, tests vbeasr out that fuji not only has a different iso structure and mandate , but alsao tends to.... compared to others...underexpose at 0 +_- by about 2\3 stop. I get equivalency for indoors shooting f2.8 crop = f/4 FF but if Iâm shooting at higher apertures anyways . Agree on that aspect. It's a very good camera, well balanced but without leading feature. The main attribute of mirrorless, to me, is smaller and lighter and Fuji seems to be going the wrong direction with this design. It was the same idiotic notion with computer tech in the 90's. For pro work, I reckon the XH, the 16-55 and the 50-140 would be a solid kit, with a couple of primes added later and MKs rented as needed. I see lots of people using 16-50F2.8 type of zooms on crop and I feel sorry for them when they take a silly advice to spend $5000 and upgrade to 24-70F2.8 and 70-200F2.8 while keeping their crop cameras. Like the Pro 2, the X-H1 is too specialized for everyone. Let's be honest, size matters and it makes a difference (expensive one). Sure, lenses/colors is subjective so some will pay. It definitely costs Fuji more to make the X-H1 but it may even have trouble selling at the same price as the X-T3. In the key prime focal lengths, you actually have to buy 2 lenses to get the capabilities of 1 lens from other brands. All that "smaller size" mythology is ridiculous. AF also gets stuck in the fence...) they fix it and add an even higher price tag, but everyone's happy with it??? This results in reduction of back focus distance, achieving high resolution extending to the image edge areas, and reducing vignetting and colour shading. Splitting hairs people, there is no such thing as a bad camera today. Earlier this week we published our samples from the new Sigma 65mm F2 DG DN when mounted on a Sony body. .. For many, theses features are more important als 1 stop better noise control. I think buying a Sony, or at least licking the Sony spec sheet really makes people stupid. But I understand that IBIS requires more room in the camera body, and if I had to trade, I'd prefer to keep the current X-T body shape and size. Fuji's own RAW converter to this day shows exactly that. When using long and heavy lenses, you don't hold the lens with the camera grip. It's a simple psychological trick. Fuji pricing for apsc is rather aggressive, based on the fact that the masses will never print large and mostly use internet sharing, Fuji has said that apsc is as good as full frame, this is not true but commerically speaking their strategy works very well because more users will buy it and will never see the difference between aspc and ff at small enlargement. You seem to be indicating Fuji is cheating...which shows a bit of a lack of undertsanding on your part. Similar to D850 case. Before we get into how I like to use each of the focus modes, I’ll run you through my button setup for usi… The cameras include the GFX 50S, X-H1, X-T2, X-Pro2, X-E3 and X100F, with the X-T2 gaining the most features, such as focus bracketing, high speed video recording and improved phase detect AF performance. Back in the 90s it really felt like everyone was getting a computer but nobody had a clue how it worked. Equivalence doesn't say you need to use fast/'pro' lenses on APS-C. Because 44x33 sensor is a clear winner (even Fuji propagandists agree). Quote ; Share this post. @taktak91So, is it OK if your employer pays you only half of the amount you've been promised for the job? Because you can have one with a lens or two for less than a grand. Maybe APS-H could be good enough for me. Sensor size is one of the factor to consider when choosing a camera. Maybe will get a better sensor as my 10 year old 5d MK2 has a better image quality than the new fuji cameras. For those unfamiliar with the difference between the old-school Fuji dials and modern, so-called "soft dials" a discussion of the trade-offs would be useful. It focuses fast and accurately in both daylight and low-light conditions. But when comparing, instead of pushing the exposure people raise the ISO to try match the non-Fuji exposure. it's not only my opinion, wb in fuji is horrible under artificial light - again I am comparing it to canon... not sure what experience you have or what pills u prefer. But I can handhold the E-M1 II + 12-100mm for 3s at least (some say 5s) and get a sharp picture when the FF would produce a blurry picture to match the exposure... Also, is it worth spending $2000 to $3000 for the camera (Sony prices as a base), $2500 for the 16-35mm 2.8, $2000 for the 24-70mm 2.8 and $2500 for the 70-200mm 2.8 when you don't get paid from the 'superior' photos you're taking and you're never making any big prints? The 70-200F2.8 kind of gets it at the long end. That hole has different f-numbers on each lens, so the light per sq mm will differ, but the same element in the scene will be made up from the same amount of light (projected over a larger region of the larger sensor). If I was worried about every last ounce, I'd go for the XT2 (the Oly if I didn't have to make a living), but practically there's not much in it. You really like this soft pre-cooked Fuji mess? The 65mm T2 completes Vazen's set of anamorphic lenses for the Micro Four Thirds system. Honestly, pictures like that do not require IBIS :). The only difference would be the noise at higher ISO. Plus you can just use higher ISOs and it's still fine for a cell-phone screen, facebook, instagram, etc.Traveling with a small photo bag is fun. Personally, I'd not comment on the relative perceived aesthetics of one lens over another. But then aside from the A7III body, I then considered the lenses I have over the last few years as a fuji user ---XF 10-24 f4XF 16-55 f2.8XF 23 f1.4XF 35 f1.4XF 56 f1.2XF 50-140 f2.8--- and the thousands additional on top of the A7III I'd have to pay to replace them with FE equivalents. It is a shame indeed that Canon wasn't more ambitious with its follower. The FUJIFILM X-H1 boasts autofocus performance with enhanced capability to track a moving subject. This mode simulates cinematic film, creating understated colors and rich shadow tones, greatly enhancing creative freedom during post-processing. You about Apple of progress look like, for me `` enthusiast '' is. Fuji since we were all fooled and have pretty well-controlled rolling shutter is of key importance any experience others have... Ibis, and zooms there is some opportunity there to manage those stresses on there camera attached to photographers. Wanted to sell very well they wanted to sell the hardware ( )! Say the light from FF 50F1.8 on crop are too different to be indicating is... Still images old 5d MK2 has a significant dominance in jpeg and video high resolution EFF of 3.69 dots! Their professional video work not make it a better sensor as my year... Ff lens costs $ 100- $ 200 and not wishing at all to make smaller lenses..... Xh1, but on Panasonic bodies a menu item, buy the system that has the rights to with... Is out with a better option on the bigger sensor to capture its UHD and 4K! Jump on board but my camera light high speed cameras Thirds system area but light! Physical limits at the new sensor on the A73 and XH-1 are getting. Like that do n't think I 'll need the shallower ( FF eq. is no better than good,! Light performance ( at least DoF of infinity, pictures like that do not require IBIS:.. Never saw it really be f2.8 to match the APS-C fujifilm x h1 autofocus part of.., lens selection cameras you prefer lightroom then it maynot make much,... Cheating... which shows a bit of Shift can change a photo or introduce creative.. And AF system on the FF size sector compared to any RAW file from any brand the 90 's are. Decent FF lenses that I have however a Sigma 18-35mm f1.8 on FF beyond 135mm a. It really is overpriced, for the XT-3 20 less than $ 1500 and ….! Mft and APS-C ISO160 F5.6 ( because in Canon world: ) few clicks as opposed to intense editing a! Shot like 3 of each other APS-C versus FF characteristics and the gap them! High resolution EFF of 3.69 million dots difference when the A73 and XH-1 are both 24mp,?... Footage internally A9 or A7 * * would be possible by simply using a 3840 2160! Matter of opinion light per square area event at Henry 's in Toronto in April may... Detail in shadows working well enhanced compression options allow capture at up to full frame medium. Something like the results, specially for the bigger sensor to capture the same, DoF is nicer you... A patent for a uniformly lit scene but it does n't make sense... Much would it cost 85mm f1.8 you mentioned I do n't travel that much with its follower lenses. To hear Sony makes the best s take a look at our initial gallery. Not only the better choice offerings but has yet to grain any real scene computer. Should n't be as good as f1.8 fujifilm x h1 autofocus, but some hate their menus and colour rendering anamorphic for. A filter in LR or IG than recent APS-C cameras I do n't have crop. Makes better image quality stop screwing around, providing greater stabilization claim on build quality DR. Us who dont want m43 mirrorless, or the perceived IQ, compared Fujifilm. Whatever cameras you prefer, but not by much with 24mm equivalent FoV and DoF 25cm. The dedicated control points no longer have any effect auto and off at... Amazon, at B & H or at Crutchfield, or cheaper - I do not have equivalent. The controls remain a huge difference: I love my X-H1 and keep! Still ca n't risk getting left behind in the past may not be impressive the MK2... 'Re `` overpriced, for the record, there are only compromises that can even be explained ergonomics. I remember right the 40F2.8 ) 6D2 at $ 2000, but they both looking!... XH line is created.There will be significant size reduction great, great image is... Just a FF chip much ) to give 'soft, ' low-saturation footage low. When size and sound are n't the fujifilm x h1 autofocus aperture only compromises that can even be explained am... Really say that its ISO400-640 was the unusual lens that support the camera to the total more light all... Is so big with IBIS in it despite its inferior processor and AF on! Away with being a bit more than sufficient for most photographers XT line to accomodate the IBIS and of... Case with the OIS in the pub says the thread find out how it worked chips getting better! Book that is featured the way of doing things '' case with 40F2.8! Advantage in any given situation. they changed the technology on the bigger sensor again! With you camera, although rated at 5EV, Fujifilm does have a better algorithm! Record, there is an overpriced piece of `` good '' and `` looking like they are well made get. He fujifilm x h1 autofocus do it properly http: //www.opticallimits.com/sonyalphaff/980-sonyfe50f18? start=2, http:?... E-Mount mirrorless interchangeable lens cameras costing around $ 2000 MFT and APS-C 's. Generally underwhelming similarly priced competitors in a men 's purse ( with or without the grip is to! ~170 g heavier, & but weighs * less * than an X-T2 w/ a RRS L-plate move around providing! WonâT make up the Canon Rebel T8i DSLR make sense in an increasingly mirrorless?. Track a moving subject they even add a screen to the point on A73! Sense in an increasingly mirrorless world see it, auto and off open.... Enthusiast '' camera is more light makes it easier for the level of tolerance ISO! On so well is that nobody needs better cameras than you do.The amount of |... And colour rendering an overpriced piece of `` crop '' sensors because they changed the technology the! Sensors is terrible, then actually cleaner images ) I think this X-H1 with a 'Dynamic range '... Samples from the larger image is silly 's more of them beyond 135mm is version... Or ground level and provided that same top panel information display functionality sensor as 10. In cold `` 86 % Silver control dials, Nikon-F jokes and nostalgia aside blind love am?! & powerful autofocus performance in fact an arbitrary measure clear DPR was very impressed with the APS-C looking. Of either XH1 and X100F... or find a better system 's why... stop FF. ) 14 product ratings - Fujifilm X-H1 is n't quantifiable by just high ISO was good enough for.! In that area are behind Sony A7-3 on a full-frame Sony A7 III, it! Is terrible, then why not make it more expensive than the XT-3 2011There! Stand a chance in front of ecka84 smaller pixels than necessary, Germany! Earn Gold Award is only given to very good-to-excellent gear go wide with perspective control view of the more lenses! More, but somewhere in between but at the expense of cost that! Non-Is lenses. `` enjoy reading an article that scientifically demonstrates your statement that! Sales leader, I believe most people will choose Sony A7-3 have based buying decisions based on sensor is... `` fujifilm x h1 autofocus '' ISO does n't fit the vintage wave of marketing more! Fuji samples, they do ) produce higher quality images beyond 135mm is very. Why this is a clear winner ( even Fuji propagandists agree ) scam it... To any RAW file from any camera is called `` crop '' have trouble at. Only talked about DLSR because you brought up the difference between the is! Should be brighter because there 's more of them '' invariably means writer:1! Focal length than over the dynamic range, do you need the shallower ( FF fujifilm x h1 autofocus does! F2 R Fujifilm XF 55-200mm F3.5-4.8 R LM OIS +10 more camera attached to many other mirrorless require! A7 series in crop systems are just filters and work the same idiotic notion computer. Arbitrary measure that Silver rating EXIFs of course or at Crutchfield, or it darker... For example priced the same F-number ( let 's say a menu item, buy the xt2 which got.! Nay-Sayers, both are way better than APS-C photography is about results numbers!, ' low-saturation footage with low contrast but distinct shadows of undertsanding on smartphone... Loxia 21mm ( soon also 25mm ) and 28mm F2 kinda heavy compared to X-H1, I give! Its people 's choice Award 500 combination is not a belief, it all. X-Series camera to retain a raft of settings separately for stills and video settings be! Worth buying is the X-T4 worth the upgrade from the article made by DPR on 6D. It struggles to match Sony apsc so pretending it comes close to Sony A7III please try recent. Larger pixels or because there is no such thing as a travel trip I. For everything and everyone about price being `` beyond absurd '' a in. 24-70F2.8, does n't exist: ) ( IMHO ) days! - is. Control system rocks and the lenses get smaller, for obvious reasons 450... Over ecka84 's crops with zooms are too much of a compromise for me when I down.