Jump to content

Fuji X Pro 2 video quality a huge step up - hands on with the final hardware, pre-production firmware


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 49
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

I am really pleased to say the video quality of the X Pro 2 is seriously impressive. It's not 4K but it's enormously satisfying, sharp and detailed. What's great is that now we can finally shoot movin

Typo sorry, meant film grain simulation. The film simulation (colour, contrast) modes are alive and well in video mode like I said at the top of the post, that's one of the main reasons for getting it

Ok let me back up. There are a handful of cameras that pump out a decent HD image. I'm a renter so ive tried all of them. There are no cameras under 10k that I would consider buying due to deal breake

Posted Images

Come on, this is not true. Just because Fuji released a camera that is not useless for video does not mean they are doing a lot. The new sensor has a faster readout so they managed to reduce a bit the aliasing by reading few more lines in order to create the 1080p footage.  It still has a a lot of aliasing,  no flat profile and no mic input. Moreover Olympus has the IBIS that makes it a unique camera.  Not to mention an E-M1ii with 4K in few months :)

Also Olympus had the guts to release promos shot on their cameras, whereas Fuji used A7sii:

http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/small-curiosity-x-pro-2-image-film-shot-with-te-a7sii/

Anyways, its great to have any improvement on the video side, so you can get something that is at least usable. 

I don't think you quite understand what I was talking about.

Just having a new sensor won't make the video better. There are tons of cameras that shared the same sensor, nonetheless, their video quality were completely different. It's not even about using the same codec, since there were also several cameras using the same codec and their video quality were very different as well. So it's about how you use and how you encode the data you have, so if Fuji learned how to do it, that's a huge step forward. Olympus might have the IBIS and even shot with their own camera - which I always thought to be a silly parameter - but the video still look bad. 4K will be just resolution if Olympus can't make it look good, but of course it would be great if Olympus can finally manage to deliver it.

The mic input wouldn't be expected on the X-PRO2 but the important thing, as I mentioned, is Fuji's MO, their Kaizen. They listen to their customers, if they brought video quality you can be sure that mic input is on the way, even if it doesn't come right away, I'm sure that as people will ask about it, they will bring it. Moreover I wrote that if people start buying Fuji for its video as well, a flat profile will be on its way.

Sometimes I feel like people are overrating a bit what having a flat profile means. First because not everybody really needs flat profile, if the main point is to output nice images, so unless you really need some serious color tweaking, if the camera already outputs a nice image, you won't really need a flat profile to work with and that saves you a lot of time, colour science is that important and Fuji has it, their images look great right out off the bat and that's something very few have, so it can do wonders. When the camera screw up detais on the shadow, skin colour, doesn't allow you to picture what you want, clip the highlights, etc. that's when you need the most DR possible so you can tweak it during post to make it like you want. Plus, unless you have 10-bit files you don't really have that much room to work with in a log profile, it might help you but it can also bring an unnecessary complexity to it as well and there are times that the gain might not worth it, even more if the other picture profiles re able to do it for you.

So my comment was barely about what Fuji is offering with the X-PRO2 but rather about the potential they have based on their continuous improvement via their Kaizen motto. And what I wrote is based on this first impression, so there is a need for a better more in-depth review to reach conclusions about the video quality but from this initial report, it does look like Fuji is on it's way to deliver nice video. But yeah, if you get stuck strictly with what the X-PRO2 has and fails to look at the potential behind it, it might not look like much indeed and you might downplay it like that.

Link to post
Share on other sites

.... no flat profile and no mic input...

Anyways, its great to have any improvement on the video side, so you can get something that is at least usable. 

I understand that the X-PRO2 does have mic input, but I would record sound on a Zoom F8 externally, anyway. Camera sound is really only for sync, unless you are out and about and want to grab a shot. I had done that with my X-T1 and a Rode Videomic Pro already with no problems, so expect the X-PRO2 to be similar.

For me, the big question is: can I get HDMI out for external video recording? This is still unanswered, so far!

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Administrators

Eh, not seeing what you are seeing Mr. Reid. I see some very noticeable aliasing. It certainly doesn't look filmic. I'm seeing vastly superior HD with my C100 MK2. Its sad that we still can't get solid 1080p out of a stills camera these days. 

I disagree. The 1080p of the D5500 and D7200 is very solid indeed with the Canon LOG style flat picture profile. D750 as well, very good!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I disagree. The 1080p of the D5500 and D7200 is very solid indeed with the Canon LOG style flat picture profile. D750 as well, very good!

The Panasonic cameras have solid 1080p too, as do the new Samsungs with the latest firmware. And don't forget the A7S and RX10/RX100 III, which produce excellent 1080p out of the box.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If Fuji makes a video centric camera with that awesome sensor & color science it would be a ground breaking achievement. The aps-c sensor giving us a full frame look with a speedbooster with 1 extra stop of light omg I am drooling

The Panasonic cameras have solid 1080p too, as do the new Samsungs with the latest firmware. And don't forget the A7S and RX10/RX100 III, which produce excellent 1080p out of the box.

Shit I was in love with my gh3's 1080. And the A7s had the cleanest 1080 of em all 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok let me back up. There are a handful of cameras that pump out a decent HD image. I'm a renter so ive tried all of them. There are no cameras under 10k that I would consider buying due to deal breaker issues. The C100 2 comes closest as far as HD image quality is concerned but that camera is still brutally overpriced for what it is. I also like the Canon 1dc, lovely image but even at $7k, it's still overpriced and with no high frame rates and difficult post, it's also not worth buying. Blackmagic is hit or miss. They have a great filmic look but their cameras are notoriously unreliable and I pretty much can't trust them for paid work. Panasonic have backed themselves into a corner with m43 which will always be a disadvantage in the low light department. Nikon has never even spoken to someone who shoots video for a living so their cameras are almost always DOA. The Sony A7s has a stunning sensor and very lovely 1080p but their color science is bogus, I had to turn picture profile off and no slog 2 in order to get decent gradable skin tones but when I did that, there was a 2 stop hit in dynamic range. Since it's still 8bit color, the image falls apart quickly. Basically every camera company is run by morons when it comes to video. Canon literally hate their customers. They will give you the quality you want but they will charge you twice as much as you are willing to spend. Seriously, the c300 2 should cost $7k at most. It's especially frustrating since Samsung are literally sitting on a gold mine of video tech that they have decided to waste on cell phones. Fuji color can't be beat their video functionality almost always sucks and I'm sorry but I'm not seeing the image quality in these samples. The motion cadence is pretty unpleasant and I am seeing aliasing which at this point, is totally inexcusable. Everyone always talks about how many great tools we have at our disposal but I don't see it. I think most sub $10k cameras are garbage when it comes to image quality. I'm slightly hopeful for Panasonics new camera but with Varicam branding, I have a feeling it will be a pricy item. Keep in mind that Panasonic have the GH5 due later in the year so I doubt they would produce a Varicam in the prosumer price range.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think you quite understand what I was talking about.

Maybe but I was replying to this comment:

Even more Fuji doing so BEFORE Olympus.

Fuji might have played a very nice PR game with their firmware updates (and they should since it was not that common before to have plenty of firmware updates), but other companies are doing it too. 

Olympus in particular, has brought many video-related firmware updates as has Panasonic, Samsung and recently Sony .  So saying "Fuji did it before Olympus", or only Fuji does continue to give firmware updates is simply not true. 

I agree that there many more things to video quality than just a sensor, but the previous generation of x-trans was limited in what it could do. The new generation seems better, but I would wait for a proper review before opening the champagne bottles. Especially after looking all the video examples with aliasing on the web. It could also lead to some nice video-oriented firmware updates, but Fuji is not known to pay attention to video so I wouldn't put my hopes up. Maybe with XT2 things get better.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok let me back up. There are a handful of cameras that pump out a decent HD image. I'm a renter so ive tried all of them. There are no cameras under 10k that I would consider buying due to deal breaker issues. The C100 2 comes closest as far as HD image quality is concerned but that camera is still brutally overpriced for what it is. I also like the Canon 1dc, lovely image but even at $7k, it's still overpriced and with no high frame rates and difficult post, it's also not worth buying. Blackmagic is hit or miss. They have a great filmic look but their cameras are notoriously unreliable and I pretty much can't trust them for paid work. Panasonic have backed themselves into a corner with m43 which will always be a disadvantage in the low light department. Nikon has never even spoken to someone who shoots video for a living so their cameras are almost always DOA. The Sony A7s has a stunning sensor and very lovely 1080p but their color science is bogus, I had to turn picture profile off and no slog 2 in order to get decent gradable skin tones but when I did that, there was a 2 stop hit in dynamic range. Since it's still 8bit color, the image falls apart quickly. Basically every camera company is run by morons when it comes to video. Canon literally hate their customers. They will give you the quality you want but they will charge you twice as much as you are willing to spend. Seriously, the c300 2 should cost $7k at most. It's especially frustrating since Samsung are literally sitting on a gold mine of video tech that they have decided to waste on cell phones. Fuji color can't be beat their video functionality almost always sucks and I'm sorry but I'm not seeing the image quality in these samples. The motion cadence is pretty unpleasant and I am seeing aliasing which at this point, is totally inexcusable. Everyone always talks about how many great tools we have at our disposal but I don't see it. I think most sub $10k cameras are garbage when it comes to image quality. I'm slightly hopeful for Panasonics new camera but with Varicam branding, I have a feeling it will be a pricy item. Keep in mind that Panasonic have the GH5 due later in the year so I doubt they would produce a Varicam in the prosumer price range.

Excellent Analysis !!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok let me back up. There are a handful of cameras that pump out a decent HD image. I'm a renter so ive tried all of them. There are no cameras under 10k that I would consider buying due to deal breaker issues. The C100 2 comes closest as far as HD image quality is concerned but that camera is still brutally overpriced for what it is. I also like the Canon 1dc, lovely image but even at $7k, it's still overpriced and with no high frame rates and difficult post, it's also not worth buying. Blackmagic is hit or miss. They have a great filmic look but their cameras are notoriously unreliable and I pretty much can't trust them for paid work. Panasonic have backed themselves into a corner with m43 which will always be a disadvantage in the low light department. Nikon has never even spoken to someone who shoots video for a living so their cameras are almost always DOA. The Sony A7s has a stunning sensor and very lovely 1080p but their color science is bogus, I had to turn picture profile off and no slog 2 in order to get decent gradable skin tones but when I did that, there was a 2 stop hit in dynamic range. Since it's still 8bit color, the image falls apart quickly. Basically every camera company is run by morons when it comes to video. Canon literally hate their customers. They will give you the quality you want but they will charge you twice as much as you are willing to spend. Seriously, the c300 2 should cost $7k at most. It's especially frustrating since Samsung are literally sitting on a gold mine of video tech that they have decided to waste on cell phones. Fuji color can't be beat their video functionality almost always sucks and I'm sorry but I'm not seeing the image quality in these samples. The motion cadence is pretty unpleasant and I am seeing aliasing which at this point, is totally inexcusable. Everyone always talks about how many great tools we have at our disposal but I don't see it. I think most sub $10k cameras are garbage when it comes to image quality. I'm slightly hopeful for Panasonics new camera but with Varicam branding, I have a feeling it will be a pricy item. Keep in mind that Panasonic have the GH5 due later in the year so I doubt they would produce a Varicam in the prosumer price range.

I am personally waiting for the GH5 because Panasonic has shown the most commitment to progression imo. Loved my a7s but i knew the only thing it had over my gh4 was low light performance and noise. I sacrificed a whole lot for the ability to shoot in low light and I rarely did lol. I thought Samsung had the right idea with the nx1 but some moron thought they should retreat. I agree all these companies are ran by idiots. The motion capture revolution has been growing since the 5d Mark ii but I guess they are too traditional to dedicate themself to making the leap. Still at this point I keep telling myself there are productions being shot with the iPhone 5s making it to netflix. Every camera you have mentioned here is of course severely overpowered in comparison to the iPhone so at this point I think we as film makers are a bit picky (myself included) and just need to learn to squeeze the most out of whats available to us until these companies get their act together.

All in all I have hope for Fuji because competition is good. Canon and Nikon are only morons because they haven't felt the burn of competition...yet.

Link to post
Share on other sites

DaVinci Resolve works with the footage quite well. It's impressive how much information is hidden in the shadows and is retained in the highlights. Forget about the codec bit-depth and you've got yourself a very clean and very respectable video image.

The noise floor looks to be very competitive. The colors are about right on the money. Odd to have gone through a quick DaVinci color-correction process and not get into saturation tweaks; other than the typical shadow and highlight saturation adjustments... l found that the over-sharpened shutter strobing effect was all but completely eliminated when knocking down most of the low-end saturation values... This Fuji really makes for a clean / punchy / properly saturated video image.

So yeah, I agree this is a huge step up. I'd possibly go as far as to say that this is a huge step up both for Fuji and also for single-chip large format sensors, falling outside of the realm of Canon, that somehow appear to truly punch an image out into the eye of the viewer.

My first impressions.. "Where's the shadows detail?" "Why are the highlights clipping so soon?" However, after a quick grade, I realized that Andrew pretty much nailed exposure on a camera that he had probably never used before. To me that's impressive as a shooter and also as a testament to why you'd want to work with Fuji. In the end, it's a nice balance.

Link to post
Share on other sites

DaVinci Resolve works with the footage quite well. It's impressive how much information is hidden in the shadows and is retained in the highlights. Forget about the codec bit-depth and you've got yourself a very clean and very respectable video image.

The noise floor looks to be very competitive. The colors are about right on the money. Odd to have gone through a quick DaVinci color-correction process and not get into saturation tweaks; other than the typical shadow and highlight saturation adjustments... l found that the over-sharpened shutter strobing effect was all but completely eliminated when knocking down most of the low-end saturation values... This Fuji really makes for a clean / punchy / properly saturated video image.

So yeah, I agree this is a huge step up. I'd possibly go as far as to say that this is a huge step up both for Fuji and also for single-chip large format sensors, falling outside of the realm of Canon, that somehow appear to truly punch an image out into the eye of the viewer.

My first impressions.. "Where's the shadows detail?" "Why are the highlights clipping so soon?" However, after a quick grade, I realized that Andrew pretty much nailed exposure on a camera that he had probably never used before. To me that's impressive as a shooter and also as a testament to why you'd want to work with Fuji. In the end, it's a nice balance.

Can you upload some of these footages that you did this quick adjustments? Or at least a BEFORE and AFTER snapshot, it would be quite nice.

 

 

 

Maybe but I was replying to this comment:

Fuji might have played a very nice PR game with their firmware updates (and they should since it was not that common before to have plenty of firmware updates), but other companies are doing it too. 

Olympus in particular, has brought many video-related firmware updates as has Panasonic, Samsung and recently Sony .  So saying "Fuji did it before Olympus", or only Fuji does continue to give firmware updates is simply not true. 

I agree that there many more things to video quality than just a sensor, but the previous generation of x-trans was limited in what it could do. The new generation seems better, but I would wait for a proper review before opening the champagne bottles. Especially after looking all the video examples with aliasing on the web. It could also lead to some nice video-oriented firmware updates, but Fuji is not known to pay attention to video so I wouldn't put my hopes up. Maybe with XT2 things get better.  

But that's not what I meant when I said "even more Fuji doing so BEFORE Olympus", it's simply that if Fuji really delivers a great video, they will be doing so before Olympus.

A lot was expected of Olympus after the firmware that enabled the use of the 5-axis IBIS in video mode. There was some improvements in the E-M1 but the camera that was advertised as this promissed camera was the E-M5 MKII, there were even ads shot with it, even a shortfilm and some early hands on talking about the video, but then, they couldn't quite deliver it and all the Olympus video hype cooled off. They did improve some video feats via firmware but it addressed some things video guys wanted out of the box, some extras but it didn't make the video quality better as far as I know.

PR Game? C'mon, that's far from it and there is a clear difference, the only one that had similar deliver was Samsung. If you really want, I can list the differences in how Fuji and Samsung were doing and how the others were doing, even more Sony, it's not even near the same thing and it's not about having firmware updates but what they do. And if this is really just a PR Game, I hope that everybody else does it at this level.

Fuji delivered some major feats via firmware and it wasn't just for one camera, it wasn't just for their flagship and it wasn't because the competition forced them to. They even brought - when the hardware allowed them to - some new feats that their newly released camera was bringing and it even happened when a new successor was released, you will never see Sony doing anything like it. Even a discontinued camera received some extra feats and improvements via firmware. If I missed these type of firmware improvements by the other manufacturers, then I can agree that it's truly just a mega "PR Game" by Fuji, otherwise, they have quite a catch up to do - and I hope they do, that's good for all consumers.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok let me back up. There are a handful of cameras that pump out a decent HD image. I'm a renter so ive tried all of them. There are no cameras under 10k that I would consider buying due to deal breaker issues. The C100 2 comes closest as far as HD image quality is concerned but that camera is still brutally overpriced for what it is. I also like the Canon 1dc, lovely image but even at $7k, it's still overpriced and with no high frame rates and difficult post, it's also not worth buying. Blackmagic is hit or miss. They have a great filmic look but their cameras are notoriously unreliable and I pretty much can't trust them for paid work. Panasonic have backed themselves into a corner with m43 which will always be a disadvantage in the low light department. Nikon has never even spoken to someone who shoots video for a living so their cameras are almost always DOA. The Sony A7s has a stunning sensor and very lovely 1080p but their color science is bogus, I had to turn picture profile off and no slog 2 in order to get decent gradable skin tones but when I did that, there was a 2 stop hit in dynamic range. Since it's still 8bit color, the image falls apart quickly. Basically every camera company is run by morons when it comes to video. Canon literally hate their customers. They will give you the quality you want but they will charge you twice as much as you are willing to spend. Seriously, the c300 2 should cost $7k at most. It's especially frustrating since Samsung are literally sitting on a gold mine of video tech that they have decided to waste on cell phones. Fuji color can't be beat their video functionality almost always sucks and I'm sorry but I'm not seeing the image quality in these samples. The motion cadence is pretty unpleasant and I am seeing aliasing which at this point, is totally inexcusable. Everyone always talks about how many great tools we have at our disposal but I don't see it. I think most sub $10k cameras are garbage when it comes to image quality. I'm slightly hopeful for Panasonics new camera but with Varicam branding, I have a feeling it will be a pricy item. Keep in mind that Panasonic have the GH5 due later in the year so I doubt they would produce a Varicam in the prosumer price range.

Agree with You.. a different planet.. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Problem with pictures is intrinsically the same as sound - sound recordists capture the source impeccably as they can, then mixers mix - cameramen capture as impeccably as they can the required footage, then editors and graders make the end result, no? Don't worry about "in camera" you aren't (possibly) a jobbing and stellar grader or editor - you will not finish it - the client doesn't want you to - capture it. The prod manager and director has no interaction with you - the flesh interface in a "real world job" don't worry just point the cameras they've chosen and don't fuck up, cash 30 days later - 99.9% real world. 'orrible isn't it, but so so 24/7

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...