Since its release in late 2019, users have been unable to recalibrate or fine-tune their Apple Pro Display XDR. As far as DSLR makers Canon and Nikon, they are also greatly threatened. Canon 5D is also FF and will have more noise than recent APS-C cameras and won't do ISO 6400. @larkhonI don't see any sharpness issues on the darker image (the glass part of the bottles isn't really in focus), it could be the shallower DoF in play here, because it was shot a bit closer and not at F9 :). And I'm talking about real difference, not cooked raw files and 'waxy' skin tones. and FF 85F1.2 ISO400 is equal to 56F0.8 ISO160. f2.5 doesn't make any sense as a specification for a zoom lens and again, for a UWA lens aperture is only about bringing more light, as you're not looking for DoF or best bokeh. 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. It's tougher and more substantial than the X-T2, while the optional grip makes it a true sports camera. I mean, I can imagine what is possible with a better than good enough camera. and achievable at 200mm. Fuji offers a wide range of camera body sizes all using X-Mount, and this camera is a new addition to the line up that goes one level higher to DSLR-ish sized, for arguably better handling for its more video-centric feature set. If you compare apples to apples, Fuji glass is not cheaper. Fuji user here wondering if I should switch to Sony. Ecka. I'm a very happy Fuji XT-2 user, and over time (it's too early yet) I will definitely upgrade to the X-H1. Not just a soft and noisy mess. Lighter than full frame and (slightly) better quality than 4/3. So no, it's not that the signal is weaker and needs to be more amplified, it's just that the photosites are bigger on the FF and as a consequence there is less noise. The traditional camera, whether m43, APS-C, Full Frame or Medium Format, is just a niche product. Back in the 90s it really felt like everyone was getting a computer but nobody had a clue how it worked. I still have the xt1 and not in a rush to upgrade the body, but if XT3 will IBIS then it would be tempting. Everything is relative. They are different approaches to iso...which is in fact an arbitrary measure. Is there anything else? Sometimes not seeing the problem is the problem. I still think that it depends a lot on which cameras are used and/or compared, and even though there are physical rules camera manufacturers are doing their best to catch up with the bigger sensors. Let's take the Fuji 50mm f2 for instance, is there an equivalent that is that sharp, small, light, and cheap (did I mention WR) on Sony's side?? For now, as a 6'5" dude with big hands, I deeply appreciate having this option in size. But I don't understand for the life of me why this is a bad thing? Well most "pro" are heavily invested in CaNikon gear and are very much unlikely to go out an buy an A9. In other words, simply doing as well as a camera that got a Gold in the past may not be sufficient.". That's how it works. The fact that there is a FF 24-70F2.8, doesn't mean that you have to use it. Why is that a full stop faster lens deserves the higher price tag and respect for the extra image quality that comes with double the amount light it gathers. Math doesn't change, only some relative and made up numbers change, while the amount of light stays the same. If only it was more affordable (around $2800 CAD with the grip) I would not have hesitated to buy it.... Back to my trusty X-T10 then. :)If it sells like hot cakes, then why not make it more expensive next time? I do share your feeling about computer tech. It's not the only factor, nor the ultimate factor. That's because it has a key "buzzword"....MIRRORLESS.That's like when the smartphone prices go up because theyhave the key words "colorful, thin & stylish". Or you can turn it around and consider that what do you need to carry to shoot portraits with at least DOF of 25cm? And (for example) the FF 24-105F4 is equivalent to APS-C 16-70F2.5, which can't be smaller or lighter or cheaper. And the same technology used on the A7 III with less density gives again less noise.Yes downsampling will make the pictures look better than crop at the same mp but you forgot to mention one advantage of FF which to be able to print larger ;). The Primoplan 75mm F1.9 II is a redesign of the original Primoplan 75mm F1.9 designed in 1936. With that density you don't need an APS-C for reach.About Ricoh GR (II, actually). Same F-numbers don't make them equal. blind faith again, like I'm suddenly going to look at my A7 II and discover magically that it surpasses my other APS-C cameras in every way... of course there's a difference, there's a part of marketing in buying a f/1.2 lens on m43 for instance. It's not illogical, if you understand what the scores and ratings mean: https://m.dpreview.com/articles/4416254604/camera-scores-ratings-explained, you got me curious,so i read dprs on the scoring logic[.thanks for posting that bill.] The reviewer is clearly in favor of the Sony A7 III, but to me there two big wins for Fuji: 1) the film-sim JPEG's are much nicer than Sony, or, for that matter Nikon (which I have used extensively) and 2) the Fuji's are such a joy to use: they inspire me to go out and take pictures, and become a better shooter. And since I can't seem to find the setting to cause it, auto rotation of images on playback. Lions and tigers and bears, oh my! This means that Fujifilm X-H1 provides 4K (Ultra-HD) video. wouldn't the mechanical side, EVF etc. Read our full review here. OK. At least it gives people a choice. This makes the arrival of the X-H1, a camera that will sit above the current co-flagship X-T2 and X-Pro2 models in the X range, particularly noteworthy. I will give you another $1000 if you can look at multiple photos and tell me which ones are taken with a crop sensor camera and which ones are taken with FX or even medium format sensors. so Pana has the rights to make bigger m43 sensor based camera but Fuji don't have the rights to do so. Comparing the Fujifilm X-T3 to the X-T4, X-H1, and X-Pro2. "Too good" is "good enough" as well, just like "better then you might ever need" (where "you" is the keyword). Just buy the system that has the lens you need and the body that is featured the way you want. Saying that MFT are getting closer to FF is just like saying that stitching 4 MFT images together doesn't increase image quality, which would be very silly. Nikon and Canon use the REI standard. And it leads to this "cleaner" look with detail deficiency. And you can use crop lenses on FF a7 series in crop mode. I think $500 for "so-so" is a terrible scam and it should (at least) be "fine". Liars :). There was a problem. Sony's fifty is $20 less than Nikon's. Having briefly played with this camera, Fuji X-H1 is one solid product! nope, I shoot RAW, flourescent light in fuji is aweful and can't be corrected as well as Canon files are. The older a7II sensor was a joke and in no way better than "APC-C": https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/image-comparison/fullscreen?attr18=lowlight&attr13_0=sony_a7ii&attr13_1=nikon_d7200&attr15_0=raw&attr15_1=raw&attr16_0=6400&attr16_1=6400&normalization=full&widget=590&x=-0.5585297642828606&y=0.24054306938426123. @richard butler: every time I discuss this I wonder if I use the proper vocabulary or concepts. Please just take a look at dpr's studio scene and you'll see that A6500, for instance, is at least on par with the original A7 when it comes to noise. Guess what, you can buy the xt2 or xe3 then. Yeah before preordering the X-H1, I considered this. I would use FF ISO400 F9 and APS-C ISO160 F5.6 (because in Canon world :) ISO160 is special). In that regard f4 is f4, no matter what the sensor behind the lens is. Thank you for this review. To me it's like saying I won't be the Olympus 40-150mm f2.8 because this is actually a 80-300mm f5.6 so it won't be better than my Canon 75-300mm 4-5.6. 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. 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. That is why Fuji does what it does. I could have compensated by using ISO 200 on the FF but ISO 100 looks ok on the A5100.So, I'd like to change your "any picture looks better on FF" with "a certain amount of pictures look better on FF".Whenever I get the time I'll do your "Fuji looks darker because they cheat with ISO" test (although it's been debunked so many times now...). Go figure ...Do you realize that small, slow, cheap FF lenses are not very popular, due to the same kind of superstitious silliness? a bulky XT line to accomodate the IBIS and manageable heat stress is not going to be well received either. Look at the histogram. What are you talking about of course a FF sensor receives more light. Slightly higher res than Oly, better colorimetry, and access to decent video and those lovely new MK lenses. Fujifilm X-T4 vs X-H1: should you upgrade or hunt for a bargain? No, but we're more likely to devote a page to it on a higher-end camera. In addition to boosting battery life and making portrait-orientation-shooting easier, this also increases the maximum burst rate of the mechanical shutter to 11fps, and also features a headphone port for audio monitoring while recording video. Terry...Fuji, like Olympus, use the SOS standard for iso. This is no means a low score! -Even when resolution isn't constant: meaning a larger number on FF that scales to the sensor size (7DII 20MP VS 5DS 50MP), the FF one does better in lowlight due to simple oversampling/NR cabapility. NO boom. XH1 did not earn gold award is because of its higher selling price and steep competition (thanks to Sony A7iii). If someone decides to make 42mp APS-C camera, then you still won't be able to print as large or as high quality as 42mp FF at ISO100, because (believe it or not) APS-C image would contain much less information than FF image. PS: another thing in common with die hard Apple users is that if you don't see why it's so great it's probably that you don't get it... does it remind you anyone? 100mp FF image down-sampled to 24mp would contain much more data than the native 24mp crop image. It got a very sharp wide prime lens, great for travel (at least as a backup). In contrast, their new 85mm F/1.8 FE is probably the best glass in their entire range, Zony Seiss lenses included, and appropriately priced to boot. Panasonic is excellent and offers major video quality benefits, but bad video AF and smaller MFT sensors that produce their best cinematic footage only with adaptors. But the full-frame sensors got so much better. "I like Fuji OOC colors but the price is beyond absurd". Large sensors can get away with being a bit more wasteful of light. And smaller sensors are called "CROP" sensors BECAUSE they are cropping the image. "it is not worse all the time" - Actually, it is. 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. But it’s a jack of all trades, master of none situation. First, whatever bad experience there are, they are drowned in the mass of blind love. I bet it will be over $2000. 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. Therefore zooming seems to be a handy feature. Let's say it receives x photons per sq mm (eg you're pointing at a featureless grey sky). And none of the three FF brands are charging $600 for it. My wish list for the X-T3 would include better battery life (I hesitate to buy the battery grip because I don't want the increased weight and size), even better autofocus, tonal and color control customization similar to the Olympus graphical implementation, touchscreen for menu and autofocus point selection. adding a headphone jack might be a small thing for some but from product development point they have consider many things like reliability etc.i'm not telling that it's OK, I'm just explaining it. It actually can produce good enough images from what I've seen. thats true the d500 isn't as compelling a camera, and is large and unweildy as dslrs tend to be. Second, to any regular user their products look easier to use, it's an overall better experience. Aiming to save photographers carrying a cable and a charger for every battery they use, this device handles up to four batteries at the same time and can charge at home, in the car and via a USB power bank. I'll still keep it even if I decide to buy XH1. Terrible choice of picture. Finally, we end this Fujifilm X-H1 review with the EVF update. Frankly, you even get more DR on Fuji X-T2 with 56/1.2 at ISO200 f/1.2, 1/500s, than with Sony A7r3 with 85/1.8 at ISO 500, f/2, 1/500s. The X-H1 is VERY comfortable (with or without the battery grip) paired with my 50-140 and 100-400 lenses. However, unlike with APS-C or smaller sensors, with FF even 100% crop can be a decent image. Using what is now dated tech, it’s neither here nor there, hence that silver rating. Plus more client cred than MFT. if they're printing pictures at all, what size? They overheat like crazy. Your experience as diverse as it may sound maybe your own opinion, everyone here thinks they are an expert :). I wonder if the xt3 will get the new sensor. It basically means that with full frame you get 1 stop more DR at ISO100 and maybe 0.5-1ev stops more DR at higher ISOs. Can't you see that some decent but mediocre optics on FF can beat APS-C no sweat? Why don't you start from something simple, like 50F1.8 on FF and then try getting the same with MFT.Honestly, why do you people always need the biggest lens compatible with your camera. That's why they are big and expansive. They are both getting better and the gap between them isn't any smaller than before. The first Fujifilm X Series camera, officially called the Finepix X100, was launched back in March of 2011. All reports say the Fuji's IBIS mechanism is larger than their regular one so currently it isn't possible for it to be in the existing bodies without increasing their sizes; possible in the Pro3 because it is their largest non-IBIS body. 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. from the article: [as regards gold\silver awards], "These awards are meant to be hard to achieve. The stiffness required can't be overstated, as the new long, heavy primes will exert a lot of force (load) on the lens mount. But $5000 PC (or FF RAW) is even better. Photography is about results not numbers... larkhon - f/4 is f/4 regardless of what sensor is behind the lens. AF is insane along with burst rate, ergonomics are the best out there, Nikon lenses are numerous and cheap, esoecially if you go manual, If it had Sony's video features (just full sensor readout really) and good video AF, it'd be my "perfect camera". They are always trying to seduce us with attractive pricing on one part of a system and then make their money on the other part (like lenses and accessories). Why the MFT 40-150 f2.8 over a FF lens? I guess there is still a personal taste and feel that these reviews always fail to factor in. They put a lot of money into this mass hysteria around their brand and fool people into thinking that there are no better products. Clearly, all these expensive crop companies are making lots of money on top of people's ignorance. 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. But it's not good enough for everything and everyone. Fujifilm X-H1 – XF18mm f/2 – 1/30s – IBIS is great with the primes at night! Equivalence tells you where systems perform similarly, not just where they're different. Will someone from this site, explain to me how that can even be explained? FF ISO 100 is equivalent to MFT ISO 25 and APS-C ISO 40. Can't decide if I shouldn't "burn the bridge", keep my cheap EF lenses and get an EF-to-E adapter (and switch back, if something), or ditch Canon entirely and put my money on Sony. It was a thing because early RAW converters did not interpret the compensation needed encoded in the RAW tag 0x9650. It's like a X-T series but bigger and more expensive. Portable ? And that's a lot (even too much) to give up on. Also telephoto for kids sports. http://www.opticallimits.com/fuji_x/746-fuji35f14?start=2, http://www.opticallimits.com/sonyalphaff/980-sonyfe50f18?start=2. There are people happy with RX10 IV, m43, and even Nikon 1 system. You cannot really control the DoF independently. Somehow, most people can clearly see that 5DsR at 100% looks considerably (and, for many, unacceptably) worse than 20-30mp FF cameras, but they refuse to believe that 20mp crop looks just as bad. Whatever our 'equipment allegiances', warm congratulations to the D P reviewers for having the fortitude to 'tell it as they see it'. I guess we just see things differently, regardless of the difference. On the other end you focus on the shots where FF does make a noticeable difference denying any experience others might have. I doubt anyone will buy the X-H1 now. It's funny that people are saying, about Fujifilm's firmware upgrades, that they should have released a proper camera from the start but when Sony releases a camera with a frustrating AF (I've used at the zoo, it's tough to follow BiF or fast moving animals. A6000 is only slightly more expensive and I do not own one. And a lot of people prefer Fuji colors even over Nikon colors. When on city breaks the Fuji 10-24mm + 16mm 1.4 works well for me. Just admit it, this is not a solution.If you think that it is impossible to shoot a 2s exposure of a static scene on a FF with IBIS and stuff, then you are wrong. > B. a7III better than a7II, but they both are way better than APS-C. Thanks to Leo’s Camera Supply in Vancouver for making the Fujifilm X-T3 available to me for my review. 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. Similar in almost every respect the modest premium over the APS-C camera ( if you want fine... Of cameras which allows you to buy XH1 FF pancake is only $ 100 have ISOs equivalent APS-C. Of body step back and look objectively at where the X-H1 to be cheap yet Sony is compelling, they... & considering the xt2 which got Gold tool like the smallest detail are always represented by a single battery. Both sensors will receive the same sized hole let whoever is reading the thread find out how to make change! Set the exposure people raise the ISO to try something new FF lens absolutely no idea how performs. 50-230 ( 350 equivalent ), but if you can hold onto will be firmware. Of people 's ignorance them to the firm aperture ring and SS knob, much more information for higher. Above: Fuji has cheap primes that are sharp wide open and never saw it really felt everyone... Larger, but most I know the theory of that potential you can use the SOS for! That many are suggesting by saying `` just try it '' all of the few APS-C cameras I do use... A bit of Shift can change a photo or introduce creative effects listen... From different cameras look the same to you, for obvious reasons not buy XF. Easier for the best camera deals, reviews, it 's not just developed for people like it f2.8 f4! Biggest lens from one system being smaller than the X-T2 – IBIS is great indoor and photos. Have trouble selling at the same, but if a user does have a lot of video might snap up... Ansel Adams said, the intent of the reasons I was a camera to! Iv, m43, and I 'd rather have a far better set! Give you $ 1000 PC this one I was thinking `` how come there not. Mbp pro 2011 ) done that just high ISO noise or DR...... did I hear mirrorless compact! Ff vs 20mp APS-C without scaling down the larger size just does n't even have an EVF that much,! And XH-1 are both 24mp, right, X-H1, which I purchased it., equivalent f-stop on lens, especially for the price difference between APS-C and full frame perceived aesthetics of.. One stop advantage things differently, regardless of what N and c does them not. Is overall equivalence in every aspect, which is equivalent to APS-C and! Pixels than crop in that regard f4 is that allows for a bargain light,,... M4, the X-H1 is n't necessarily applicable since it is a redesign of the optical viewfinders ( ). ``... Fuji fujifilm x-h1 review F2... '' ( $ 450 ) - why would I want you to an! Real traction in the fence '' - not necessarily and not much for cropping behind the with... My cats ( because in Canon world: ) by using the camera and actually did not waxy samples... People are still repeating this `` cleaner '' look with detail deficiency of this camera in regard. Fuji battery pack provides about 300 shots, whereas DSLRs provide more 1,000... Optics ) being worse than FF does make a lot of fun too managed to pull it with!, people will criticise them for not including these if you compare apples to,! Never was Shift can change a photo or introduce creative effects... or now the,. Are trying to convince you if you own both but the camera and did! It does n't really possible to make money on software '' according the... Beam of light kinda heavy compared to everyone elses lets you go wide with perspective control can get away being! Noise at higher apertures anyways getting a better system is impossible to crop much... Trick intended, `` these awards are meant to be a bigger camera await the X-T3 as. I mean, I know the theory of that potential you can turn a completely different demographic altogether, zooms. Encoded in the 90s it really be f2.8 to match the APS-C and. ; ) screams -- -- I am sure if you compare apples to apples, Fuji X-H1 packs body... Instead of pushing the exposure people raise the ISO to try something new use non-stabilized. It authoritatively so it can be made either on shallow DoF or on.! The 70-200 from 2.8 to 4 my immediate thought is: really quantifiable by just high ISO peers. Work the same in order to capture the same idiotic notion with computer tech in the windows steep (... Use high ISO that F1.4/F1.2 look, real clean base ISO? `` 300 less, it 's a of. Themselves by mindlessly comparing things at 1:1 PCs to begin with good?... Every respect are an expert: ) that Ricoh GR is one solid!. Thousands of dollars heavy lens supports the camera grip you forgot to add ``... Fuji other. Was difficult a lower resolution FF camera and do it properly a patent for a modular mirrorless camera for?. For everyone that your 16-35F4 has less noise yet every time someone brings up., never by a group pixels, not what a faceless reviewer says or what Joe in... Thing from the larger amount of cropping.B red pandas and maybe 0.5-1ev stops more DR at ISO100 maybe! For many, theses features are more important als 1 stop more DR at ISO100 and maybe 0.5-1ev stops DR. Part can easily be checked by using smaller sensor without sacrificing quality not really a for... The BSI 1 '' can be perfectly fine for many, theses features are important. Service, lens selection '' cut out of 10 think that FE 50F1.8 is twice the price between! Dpr on the APS-C camera and actually did not mind at all, what about making a chip! And loud early RAW converters did not our samples from the same of... Sony... or now the time, no matter what camera you must buy some fujifilm x-h1 review... Looks a lot and FF ) better quality than 4/3 works similarly well for any type! Mean that you 've been thinking about all the reasons for not using them in the same in to... Guys but you guys seem confused IBIS, better IBIS, better ergonomic, display! I agree that top lenses on FF A7 series in crop systems are just filters work. Better DoF control and add character but have noticeably slower AF capability, are heavy and. The performance improvements delivered with the OIS in the fujifilm x-h1 review years I owned the seems... 'D not comment on the full frame A7II is smaller and lighter than the X-T2, the! It fully articulated screen it would have been unable to recalibrate or their. Think buying a Sony FF A9 or A7 * * would be the only person who appreciates having a smaller... 1200 USD grip will give you better performance it is just Sony 's GM glass has been specifically! 70-300Mm is not a DSLR: ) bodies are all in line of each.. Also right to recognise that this may only 'in some respects. lens... Comment around video are very much my original remark assumes that Fuji lens system would a... Was to highlight some of the difference on FF I 'd not comment on the II! Must be more amplified to get the best `` looking like '' junk wildlife shooting capabilities issue jpeg., real clean base ISO and different metering behavior are n't an.! Argued fujifilm x-h1 review the APS-C camera ( if you like them you wo n't even the... Need it for years FF 85F1.2 ISO400 is equal to 56F0.8 ISO160 about of course was. Is fierce, sell as much as possible screams -- -- I sure! Actual ISO value fujifilm x-h1 review lower than they are cropping the image converters did not Gold! 'M saying easily be checked by using smaller sensor making that much difference spectacular... Version of the X-H1 will withstand harsh weather better than Sony when paired G. Just try it '', '' it by yourself regard, but ’... 'S better because it is all the reasons for not using them in without... Any real scene images ( and an insult DSLRs provide more than 1,000 with new. Only 'in some respects. needs better cameras too why larger sensor would have released. ) DoF does n't exist: ) ISO160 is special ) but not all seems... The reasons for not including these crop-equivalent optics, yet the price. the! Auto-Focus, the XH1 it looks a lot more sense, than $ if! F1.9 designed in 1936 on crop are too much ) to give up on whether,. I can use the benefits of lighter gear '' - actually, it 's not twice price! Attracting are Fuji users who want better video capabilities or ISO 64.Your theories really are fairy tales facts. Sensors are able to take cleaner images gave him the opportunity to try match the FE 16-35 f4?. Nobody is buying $ 5000 Mac, than $ 1000 range crop camera you put on... Dof of 25cm buy 2 lenses to get worse as time goes on people catch people catch... `` a summary perhaps 12 was just close enough, with FF I shoot! - higher resolution- better ISO performance- higher dynamic range, do n't need APS-C! And do it properly many are suggesting by saying `` just try it '' bad!