Emanuel

I am positively impressed -- above my most optimistic expectations:

Tracking is actually the most significant difference to the Blackmagic offer : -)

Exactly my cup of tea. Random AF is rather frightening BTW, even though I concur makes some sense for gimbal use... And here's some teaser to you ; -)

https://www.eventbrite.co.uk/e/pocket-cinema-camera-4k-european-launch-event-registration-50396784138 Today directly from my email inbox: To the European Launch of the new Blackmagic Pocket Cinema Camera 4K! Join us and the Blackmagic team in London on Wednesday, October 10th to mark the introduction of the new Blackmagic Pocket Cinema Camera 4K. You will see the first projects shot with the camera, meet the filmmakers and get some hands-on time, as well as a night of music, food and drinks!

You don't track focus on your upcoming P4K but you'll be able to push AF focus anyway ; -)

Exactly my feelings since X-H1 4K transferred then to the other old models through firmware update. With Fuji you simply can't go wrong unless you have no clue what you're doing at all : -)

@jhnkng Thank you for your post. I am looking for glass options along a Fuji camera being X-T3 or X-H2 when released. For AF use. Other than that, the upcoming Pocket 4K (touchscreen focus aka tap to focus) is my primary choice, with Panny cams from past already in use or other acquisition tools exclusively for manual focus shooting. Have you seen that video test up there? Any outcome is a combo route. We should never forget that. It is rather possible some bad performance may end a sweet spot combined with some other factor in-between. Exactly my wondering even though I never exclude zooms. Their versatility (framing is invariably key) cannot be matched by a prime lens. 16-55mm f/2.8 seems to be (my only experience with Fujifilm is restricted to film) a combination of primes set despite the slower range.

Does it work accurately '99% of the time'? Smoothly between focus transitions? At low light included? What lenses are you using for? Only the 35mm f/2? Can you add some test samples? : -)

Thanks Chris : ) That's what I really intended to. Fuji users may come and leave to us upcoming brand users the finest experience of your own. Pretty useful : -) What about the zooms? I'd love to hear from Fujicron shooters: what about those complaints as far as IQ concerns at the fastest end? Mainly when we are focused on that quiet and quick AF f/2 focal length feature for video. Any other takers?

Because of most recent announcements and camera releases... Amongst other several ones, here are two interesting sources FYA: https://fstoppers.com/education/no-larger-sensors-do-not-produce-shallower-depth-field-254158

UK... closer : -)

The user Vic Chapman hints another useful one here with a quad linear motor: https://www.thephoblographer.com/2015/09/10/review-fujifilm-90mm-f2-r-lm-wr-x-mount/ There's also the macro route on 80mm f/2.8 vs 16mm f/1.4: Or then, the 50-140 f/2.8 for twice the weight coupled to some extension tube for extra macro feature as another good alternative: Or yet, the cheaper route: As basics, extension tubes can offer an interesting macro add-on to a primary fav kit: f/2.8 16-55m + 50-140mm (only 1-stop slower than the f/2 road but as quick & quiet autofocus as the Fujicrons, I presume) with a teleconverter XF1.4X to couple an extra 2-stops faster 23mm f/1.4 for flexible wide and still portrait all-round shooting prime -- my best alternative to this trinity, I do believe: https://fujilove.com/the-fujicron-f2-trinity-all-the-lenses-i-will-ever-need/ Earlier than the arrival of the promising fastest mirrorless lens ever: https://fstoppers.com/gear/fujifilm-planning-insane-33mm-f1-autofocus-lens-271161

More complaints on the f/2.0 vs the f/1.4 counterpart, this time all about the 23mm focal length but there's also a comment on the 56mm f/1.2 to infer it as slow with autofocus (by the YT user, buddahlushious on the comments section): "I have the 23 F2 but im underwhelmed by the IQ. At first i was happy with the lens but after I got the 16mm you can really see a difference in IQ between the two. So im still looking into the 1.4 and see if i will sell the f2" ~ madwindsurfer (YT user on comments) "(...) used both 1.4 & 2 versions, the f2 is almost silent AF and much smoother - however when used for close focus work the image is SOFT unless you use f4 or more." ~ Mike Whiles (YT user on comments) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dIBVrApLrNQ Following all this discussion, I'd tend to see both f/1.4 23mm (more versatile lens) and 16mm as second thought to couple with the zoom 16-55mm f/2.8 while waiting for the upcoming 33mm f/1.0 bomb, even though, under some perspective that zoom may end as the ultimate basic glass for: https://***URL removed***/forums/thread/4155396 https://***URL removed***/forums/thread/3974837 As for instance the following comments: by the user Ambulater: "I had both lenses, but sold the 16mm f/1.4 after using the 16-55mm for awhile." https://***URL removed***/forums/thread/4181174 by the user Bmat: "The 16-55 is my favorite lens. I rarely use the 16 1.4 by comparison. And after getting the 16-55, I got rid of my 18-55 and 23 1.4." https://***URL removed***/forums/thread/4137795 On the other hand, others like myself feel the 23mm f/1.4 as the first prime to go: "Depends on where you travel and what you shoot there. But the thoughts are the same. 16 is nice and wide but the 23 is more versatile because it’s not that wide." https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MI68Gj8j_I8

But don't mention it is because of their DPAF or that would make him nominated to the most ungrateful deed of this photo event's year edition : D especially coming from a rep of such videocentric place like ours LOL ; -)

1-stop faster will undeniably be : ) When, though? In two years or so? Heavier can too, don't forget ; ) Right, different doesn't necessarily mean better... Or yet, enough for your AF needs. The whole of my wondering, actually. Indeed. Reason why my conjecture on the older f/1.4 vs the quicker AF f/2.0... Motors fast (sorry @DBounce LOL) enough. If so, why more speed in any way other than as strictly under stills shooting perspective, as matter of fact. Sound can justify a 2nd purchase later on; the extra cost may push you there now made from scratch.

I've seen your trinity purchase indeed, coupled to your 16mm f/1.4. This new X-T3 made me to actually switch from my X-H1 purchase plan. I'd rather include some other f/1.4 in-between anyway. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WCzdde0EjjY "Sold the 1.4 for the f2. Disapointed with f2 not sharp till f4...bought the 35mm f1.4 again." ~ Count Alucard (YT user on the YT comments section) 'Faster AF' not 'faster lens/glass'. I don't find this terminology confusing at all. Pretty accurate, actually : ) Call it quicker as you wish : -) To be quicker doesn't mean better though.

I believe 32 years after my 1st Panny purchase followed by others to count each decade after, must have some care by these suppliers. I just don't think they're going in the right direction on that (AF) one. Still customer, so demanding. I'm not even the typical AF shooter guy, go figure! : ) Others do, gimbals time. If not, I simply would not care about at all.

No, this can work for you, perhaps. But no every people enter in 'my dick is bigger than yours' argument or sorta alike : ) I am their client for three decades now. Without mention to have invested my OWN money and my partners' resources in their glass lineup. I am demanding more care on my own needs from them. As simple as that. Funny coincidence BTW: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panny https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Panny : -)

So, some other approach oblige, isn't it? Canon, Sony, Fuji have done it. When Panny...?! @webrunner5@jonpais Out of likes today.

I guess no matter the technique, the newer the faster : ) My fair point is to wonder on the practice for good enough outcome. As well, as far as focus transition smoothness concerns. Any experiences out there?

http://www.fujifilm.com/products/digital_cameras/xf_lens/roadmap/ To begin with. Anyone here has something to tell on 23mm f/1.4 vs faster AF f/2 WR models but at video end? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dIBVrApLrNQ "I tested this (23mm f/1.4) in the shop on the X-E3. The AF was disappointingly slow and imo not usable in cases where you want to shoot moving objects like playing children eg.. I compared with the 23 mm f2 and that was snap fast! Would have liked the 1.4 though for its bokeh though..." ~ Raf Degrève on YT comments section What about along the new X-T3?

Right. Reason why people here want a hybrid tool to focus on video rather than the opposite. Still hybrid. It's all about that. Seems they are simply neglecting that. Jannard's DSMC, after all, but for affordable range and indies friendly without breaking the bank. No more no less.

Coming from an old brand user like you, this has its impact to the discussion. Speaks by itself. I believe what people want to see here is increasing tech specs (being more efficient autofocus for video, one of them) to be adopted instead. : -)

LOL No creation stands, everything is copy paste nowadays, quotes included with or without misquotes, I'd say ; -)