Castorp

That's you who tries to sell your opinion as fact. You get more and more ridiculous.
2+2=4 - that's math and NOT a matter of opinion. Just stop trying to redefine axioms. Even personal attacks don't make your crude theories become true.

When you said you don't see a difference I respected that opinion. I gave my opinion but respected yours.
You however are trying to force your crap on me and are trying to say "Im right and anyone not agreeing is an idiot".
The only thing I take away from that is that you are not a photographer. You haven't convinced me of anything except that. In my eyes you are now a camera guy.
There is no need to debate or argue about this. You see one thing, I see another. Respect it and move on.

I used to drive a nice oldtimer. A classic Jeep. A nice one. It's a very stylish and cool car. And for driving and transportation, it's way ahead ot any cheap Toyota at maximum of 2.000 $ you can get today. Driving this car regularly was a joy. The glorification of modern digital is BS. I have dozens of HQ (even on metal paper) prints proving this.
Just say: "I don't like it!" Saying it's not unique, is saying you are not able to see the look when working with film out of a classic camera. And yes, you need hours to get the same look. With film it's a matter of minutes. Just do a blind A/B test...

The shutter is the best thing about the camera - honestly. You need only the slightest half press to focus and little bit more to trip the shutter. Despite this, it is easy to apply the right pressure for the right task. And it is sooooooooooooo quiet.

This.
The thing to look for isn't so much Mojo but Mego as in it makes you want to go out and use it.
That's what concerns me about the A7iii as its a great spec but the only thing I ever feel like shooting after picking up one of their cameras is myself, with a large calibre pistol.
 

In my experience, the most significant part of the mojo of most cameras still resides within the circuitry of whoever is operating it.
I've made enough bad images with good cameras to recognise it.
Prefix it with "Then"  and it will be interpreted as such but honestly I'm just not going to engage any more with this.
Its no coincidence that every thread that I open that you are involved in might as well start auto playing the theme tune from Rocky.
English may not be your first language but antagonism might well be.

Plenty of people do paid work with 8-bit material. I've shot a number of events and done a few cheap/free broadcast commercials. All were 8-bit, and I go back to the 5d2 in like 2008 or so. All of the spec was either 720/60p or 1080/30p and a minimum bitrate of 50mbps. I've never shot 10-bit or more outside of tinkering with a C300 and a Red a few times. Scratch that -  I had a BMPCC for awhile, so I did shoot some raw/prores. But I never did any paid work with it because the workflow didn't jive with my run-and-gun shooting style.
People keep repeating things like Netflix of BBC standards, which in most cases apply to them - not everyone. I know people that have shot stuff for Discovery, Nat geo and so on with gear below their published standards. If you're doing stuff for broadcast, then it might be an issue, but if you're shooting weddings or TV spots, its not an issue.
I never understand why people criticize specs from their own bubble. If you want a 10-bit camera, this isn't for you. If you want to shoot for 3 straight hours, this isn't the camera for you. Move on. Why keep repeating the same numbnut argument and clogging up this thread?
Back to the XH1- I absolutely love Eterna. 24p looks beautiful. I'm much more excited about this camera than the A7III. It looks like a winner. I'm looking forward to mine arriving soon.
Chris

@CastorpDefinitely agree about frustration / confusion.
So many people seem to see cameras as being as good as their best spec, and ignoring the weaknesses of a particular camera, but I think the opposite is true, a camera is only as good as the weakest feature it has that you use.
I bought a the Canon XC10 which was almost universally hated because it didn't do anything spectacularly well but also didn't have any amazingly bad weaknesses, and yet people rave about the GH5 when I eliminated it immediately as it can't be trusted to focus.  Partly this is people having different requirements (eg, if you use manual focus), but also it's due to people not taking into consideration the practicalities of real-world use.
In purchasing my setup for my own personal projects I eliminated so many cameras - even if a camera shoot RAW 16K in 16-bit with 20 stops of DR it would be useless if it can't reliably focus (GH5), or ran out of battery (A7SII), or its really heavy and you're too exhausted from carrying it to use it (complete BMPCC rig), or you get hassled by security or they won't let you in the venue because your camera is too large for working without a shooting permit (C100), or you don't have it because it's too expensive and you can't afford it in the first place (1DXII), or many of the above (1DC, Red Raven, URSA mini, Kinefinity, Digital Bolex, etc etc etc...)!

Well I guess if you are Really good at exposure, proper lighting, not shooting into the sun, etc, 8 bit works. It has somehow worked for many years,
But in a professional venue they have every base covered. Better cameras, great cameramen, great audio, great lighting, great graders, great editors, great actors, on and on.
So it is hard for the average person to compete with the Pros, but now I think the gap has been closed a Lot. But you are not going to do Green Screen, VFX effects in 8 bit very well.
But I think we beat ourselves up too much anymore on output quality. I am not saying to not try as hard as possible to achieve it, but at the cost of always being in debt, worrying about it all the time Bah I say.
Look back how bad 8mm cameras were, super8 even. Nobody said damn that sucked. They were happy to see what had been shot, not complaining about the quality. And I would imagine most of the people that watch videos have no clue what 90% of the problems we piss and moan about even exist. I would say the most important thing that drives me crazy is poor Audio, not poor video, in a short or a long. And other than one person on here, we rarely ever even talk about that subject.

Very nice colours in that Nepal video. I like how Eterna make the skies a tad cyan. Nice dynamic range and the night clips are beautiful too. Nice AF shift to that boy that suddenly enters in front of the main subject. 
I disagree with Northrup that the XH1 should have had a fully articulating screen. I really dislike them and it would be a definitive deal killer – I don't want to look down at my screen off the camera's center axis. Annoys me to no end. The articulation also adds extra movements that have to be performed to view the screen. Should just be a flip up motion like on a 500CM or Rolleiflex. I understand that it is valuable for vloggers but there are better cameras for vlogging than a reinforced sturdy pro body like this. For the occasional self portrait or weird angle I've found the smartphone app to work perfectly well. 

Very nice colours in that Nepal video. I like how Eterna make the skies a tad cyan. Nice dynamic range and the night clips are beautiful too. Nice AF shift to that boy that suddenly enters in front of the main subject. 
I disagree with Northrup that the XH1 should have had a fully articulating screen. I really dislike them and it would be a definitive deal killer – I don't want to look down at my screen off the camera's center axis. Annoys me to no end. The articulation also adds extra movements that have to be performed to view the screen. Should just be a flip up motion like on a 500CM or Rolleiflex. I understand that it is valuable for vloggers but there are better cameras for vlogging than a reinforced sturdy pro body like this. For the occasional self portrait or weird angle I've found the smartphone app to work perfectly well. 

Very nice colours in that Nepal video. I like how Eterna make the skies a tad cyan. Nice dynamic range and the night clips are beautiful too. Nice AF shift to that boy that suddenly enters in front of the main subject. 
I disagree with Northrup that the XH1 should have had a fully articulating screen. I really dislike them and it would be a definitive deal killer – I don't want to look down at my screen off the camera's center axis. Annoys me to no end. The articulation also adds extra movements that have to be performed to view the screen. Should just be a flip up motion like on a 500CM or Rolleiflex. I understand that it is valuable for vloggers but there are better cameras for vlogging than a reinforced sturdy pro body like this. For the occasional self portrait or weird angle I've found the smartphone app to work perfectly well. 

I wasn't too sure about Eterna but Shultz has sold me 
 

4K, nice colors. Looking good

Yes. Thats exactly what is allowed. But you didn't live by that standard. You ridiculed people's personal opinions and tried to push your own opinions as facts. If thats not a fanboy its at least the closest thing to it in my book.
And please stop dragging me into this conversation. Im done since long ago, you made my ignore list same day as I encouraged you to use it on me. But like I said earlier, I will check in and I will react to cheap shots.

Of course bugs and bad testing is not acceptable. I can easily name plenty of things which I think suck and should be improved on my X-Pro 2.
I think the list that jonpais wrote now in his last post was constructive. The earlier repeated posting about how the manual controls are not right is ok to say once but when it’s repeated again and again it can be perceived as flaming. I mean I wouldn’t post repeatedly in a GH5 thread how the camera is broken because it doesn’t have an aperture ring.
Ergonomics are subjective.
Therefore a variety of designs is a good thing. 
One of the things I’m most excited about in the XH1 is the option of linear manual focus. Finally. The other is the supposedly shortened lag when the camera switches between finder and screen. I find this intolerable and therefore mostly have my camera set to “viewfinder only”.
 

Of course bugs and bad testing is not acceptable. I can easily name plenty of things which I think suck and should be improved on my X-Pro 2.
I think the list that jonpais wrote now in his last post was constructive. The earlier repeated posting about how the manual controls are not right is ok to say once but when it’s repeated again and again it can be perceived as flaming. I mean I wouldn’t post repeatedly in a GH5 thread how the camera is broken because it doesn’t have an aperture ring.
Ergonomics are subjective.
Therefore a variety of designs is a good thing. 
One of the things I’m most excited about in the XH1 is the option of linear manual focus. Finally. The other is the supposedly shortened lag when the camera switches between finder and screen. I find this intolerable and therefore mostly have my camera set to “viewfinder only”.
 

Of course bugs and bad testing is not acceptable. I can easily name plenty of things which I think suck and should be improved on my X-Pro 2.
I think the list that jonpais wrote now in his last post was constructive. The earlier repeated posting about how the manual controls are not right is ok to say once but when it’s repeated again and again it can be perceived as flaming. I mean I wouldn’t post repeatedly in a GH5 thread how the camera is broken because it doesn’t have an aperture ring.
Ergonomics are subjective.
Therefore a variety of designs is a good thing. 
One of the things I’m most excited about in the XH1 is the option of linear manual focus. Finally. The other is the supposedly shortened lag when the camera switches between finder and screen. I find this intolerable and therefore mostly have my camera set to “viewfinder only”.
 

Thought to myself, "I'll go to the X-H1 thread and talk about some of the assumptions about Fuji AF being substandard versus my contrary experience of of the AF using the X-T2 for some very demanding tasks and also my tests of the Face Detect AF on it last year and....."
Well, then I opened the thread....
 
 

I like GAP athletic fit jeans, and I just cant wrap my head around how anyone would think GAP loose fit jeans are any good.
 

@jonpais a crime no. but stating the above repeatedly over & over is excessive and reeks of negative bias. you've made these points clear pages ago, why not give it a rest and move on? camera clearly isn't for you.. me personally none of what you list there is even close to being a deal breaker and aperture ring control (along the ISO/SS top dials) is what drew me to Fuji in the first place.. different strokes for different folks

Of course it can also function as a video camera. It is a hybrid just as the designer is saying in that video. jonpais could have taken a screenshot of the interview two seconds later when the same guys says “especially for photo use”. He also says a few seconds later that this camera can function as a solution for very small video projects. It’s not a professional video camera. It is a professional grade stills camera however. I remember reading elsewhere about this too. Perhaps it was Billy in the camerastoretv interview saying apropos the lack of 10bit that let’s not forget that this is not primarily a video camera. I forgot. In the dpreview interview the same designer talks about how the XH1 is made with DSLR users in mind. The grip, robustness and improved autofocus makes this camera a more viable D500 or 7D alternative. The Fuji 200 f2 is coming later this year and that is a large heavy lens that this camera was made for. I can see it as a perfect mate to the 50-140 2.8 and the 16-55 f2.8.
We can start counting photo features vs video features in the design. It’s more optimised for photography. As are the lenses with the exception of the new MK zooms.
Hybrid cameras are in demand and it’s great to see Fujifilm putting some good video features including one simulation for video. I think it can be a very versatile camera but if my main objective was video then I think the GH5 is still better, for video. But I don’t think the XH1 was ever intended to really outdo the GH5 on video.
The XH1 is a professional mirrorless stills camera with excellent video features. Just as, say, the EM1ii.

Of course it can also function as a video camera. It is a hybrid just as the designer is saying in that video. jonpais could have taken a screenshot of the interview two seconds later when the same guys says “especially for photo use”. He also says a few seconds later that this camera can function as a solution for very small video projects. It’s not a professional video camera. It is a professional grade stills camera however. I remember reading elsewhere about this too. Perhaps it was Billy in the camerastoretv interview saying apropos the lack of 10bit that let’s not forget that this is not primarily a video camera. I forgot. In the dpreview interview the same designer talks about how the XH1 is made with DSLR users in mind. The grip, robustness and improved autofocus makes this camera a more viable D500 or 7D alternative. The Fuji 200 f2 is coming later this year and that is a large heavy lens that this camera was made for. I can see it as a perfect mate to the 50-140 2.8 and the 16-55 f2.8.
We can start counting photo features vs video features in the design. It’s more optimised for photography. As are the lenses with the exception of the new MK zooms.
Hybrid cameras are in demand and it’s great to see Fujifilm putting some good video features including one simulation for video. I think it can be a very versatile camera but if my main objective was video then I think the GH5 is still better, for video. But I don’t think the XH1 was ever intended to really outdo the GH5 on video.
The XH1 is a professional mirrorless stills camera with excellent video features. Just as, say, the EM1ii.

Fujifilm designers have said themselves that the X-H1 is first and foremost a stills camera (as is the rest of the X system). They’re really incredible for stills.
Sure the underlying sensor can be found elsewhere but then there are the lenses and the fantastic image quality resulting from a unique imaging chain with things like xtrans and the film simulations.
The X-H1 is not a video camera like the GH5.
It’s a fantastic stills camera with good video functions.
A better and more relevant comparison would be with the Panasonic G9 or the OMD EM1ii or A7riii.
The best thing with Fujifilm are the ergonomics. I come from a fine art background and artists I know are switching to Fujifilm en masse because they are easy to use. One can see the shutter, aperture and ISO at all time and it really can’t be understated how important this is. Important for the creative process but also fun to use!
It was also suggested that people who prefer this type of ergonomics somehow have lesser taste or poor understanding of design. A preference for dials was linked to poor typography and dysfunctional democracy. That is an unfair thing to say. People work differently, think differently and what works best for some doesn’t work at all for others. Fujifilm ergonomics are without peers. They are decidedly more fun to use and easier to understand. 

Not for me. Its about the controls. Great lens lineup, nice colors and mindblowing ISO preformance is bonus.
Ps. Its not supposed to have "argumenting power", I found it very interesting and people can take away what they want from it