Jump to content

The 4K Fuji X-T2 is here


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 996
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

My first video review, shot on the X-T2  

Wow... two thousand grand is... TWO MILLION BUCKS!!! That is a lot of scratch for a camera and grip - I'd at least want a lens, and 5 Ferraris...

I take back what I said in my last post. I just did some side by sides with my Nikon D5500 on the Flat profile (which i've previously described as having as much DR as the C100 II) and the Fuji is act

Posted Images

11 hours ago, Kisaha said:

I do not see many video professionals going full time Fuji, as of now. Maybe in the next couple of years or so.

Enthusiasts, die hard Fuji funs, and upper-middle class purists and hipsters. There are a lot more specialized users, than let's say, people buying the 700$ Panasonics, or a6xxxx.

The Fuji system is not cheap, it is a notch and a bit more than Sony APS-C, and a lot more than NX and m4/3 (thought, now with the new GH5 and Olympus,  and the 1.2-1.4f lenses the price difference us mininal, or in favor of Fuji), while this is the first truly good camera for people doing 60/40% video, or more. 

The picture profiles, are existed in every image capturing device too, I like Fuji's as well, but it is not so groundbreaking as people suggest. With slight tweeks at post one can achieve similar results, and can use a picture profile, and then add a little bit of something (real super35 film grain?) or even luts.

They still need a few things, but they are going there. I closely follow them and I am excited about every new product, as they seem to be the best listeners in the industry (them, and Panasonic!).

Fuji certainly isn't cheap, but Sony's F1.4 primes and F2.8 zooms are considerably more expensive than Fuji's, and none of their APS-c only lenses are faster than f/1.8. When you start looking at the system as a whole, costs are not very different and can easily fall in favor of Fuji when you start comparing all of the lenses. The Em1.2 is $400 more than the XT2, and I'm betting the GH5 will be priced even higher.

NX doesn't have anything close to Fuji's lens selection, outside of the two S zooms, everything is slower and doesn't cover nearly as many FL's as Fuji. And there won't be any new NX lenses. Or bodies. Ever.

Fuji has a new lens every few months and all of the traditional focal lengths covered. They have zooms from 10-400mm, along with fast native primes in 14, 16, 18, 23, 27, 35, 50, 56, 60 and 90mm with more coming. There's also 3rd party Touits and Sigmas that are mirrored on Sony. 

I've been a die hard Sony shooter for years, but I'm seriously looking at Fuji with the XT2 and dumping my a7rII and a6300. The controls, dual cards, the joystick, the speed (its so much faster than the a6300 and a7rII in operation), the SOOC colors, the lack of Sony's ugly magenta tinted skin tones and so on make it a pretty compelling option. I rented one for a few days and absolutely love shooting with it more than any Sony body I've ever used.

These are great times, we have so many compelling options that are capable of producing some incredible images.

Happy shooting.

Link to post
Share on other sites

@Trek of Joy Exciting times and great tools we have.

I mostly agree with what you said (almost what I already said), one point thought that most people seem to misunderstood, is the fact that if you need only 3-6 lenses that you can find in a specific system, then the hundrends of lens options in other systems are not that important. How many people can afford, or need so many lenses? Also, the NX1 is 2 years old, but still better in most things than any Fuji. Sony is kind of a joke in my opinion (especially for APS-C users), but their aggressive stance gains them a big market share and they eventually (A7sXVI) will produce the perfect hybrid.

Link to post
Share on other sites

What kind of people buy a camera with dials for ISO, shutter speed and exposure compensation? I think, these are people who think that they get better results when taking full control.

2 minutes ago, BookMark said:

wouldn't it be totally mind blowing if fuji provide some way of shooting f-log internally and provide you the LUT (internally or via computer) to recreate all their simulation modes. almost like half way house to RAW. 

It would be mind blowing, but also the end of Fujifilm MILCs, because they would give away their advantage over the competition. Also, there are camera profiles in Lightroom, it still doesn't match the camera's internal raw converter.

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Lothar said:

What kind of people buy a camera with dials for ISO, shutter speed and exposure compensation? I think, these are people who think that they get better results when taking full control.

People like me. :) I really dislike the tiny, mushy, unresponsive buttons for WB and ISO on the Lumix GH4. I also happen to prefer the aperture rings on lenses like the Nocticron 42.5 f/1.2 and Nokton 17.5mm f/0.95 to changing the aperture electronically. But that's just me, heh.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I do want full control and shooting M most of the times, and I do not found the Fuji controls to my liking. It was good some time ago, simulating analog ergonomics, in my opinion is not sufficient for 2016. I love the NX1 ergonomics, if anyone has any experience with it (you can do most things without change your holding) and the Canon C ones for video.

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Kisaha said:

@Trek of Joy Exciting times and great tools we have.

I mostly agree with what you said (almost what I already said), one point thought that most people seem to misunderstood, is the fact that if you need only 3-6 lenses that you can find in a specific system, then the hundrends of lens options in other systems are not that important. How many people can afford, or need so many lenses? Also, the NX1 is 2 years old, but still better in most things than any Fuji. Sony is kind of a joke in my opinion (especially for APS-C users), but their aggressive stance gains them a big market share and they eventually (A7sXVI) will produce the perfect hybrid.

For me I need the holy trinity of zooms for event work, a UWA (10-24 in Fuji), a standard (16-55) and a tele (50-140), Fuji's top Sony's APS-c f/4 options in terms of IQ/speed and the GM's are just silly at $2500, and of course they're FF. For low light and creative stuff I shoot with three fast primes, a 16, 23 and 56 which hits 24/35/85 in FF terms. Sony's 16 is garbage and while the 24/55 are really good, given Fuji's regular lens sales - Fuji's are faster and cheaper. After testing the XT2, all I can say is I'm impressed - enough to be seriously considering a system shift despite the costs. Its just so much nicer to shoot with than any body I've used, and that includes the Nex7, a6000, a6300, a7s, a7II, a7rII, GH4, EM5, NX1, 5d2 & 3 and d750 in recent years. I'd prefer a touchscreen, but most of the cameras I've owned don't have one so I can live without it. IBIS is the one thing I'll miss the most with a Fuji move, but after shooting handheld with stabilized lenses the XT2 footage is more stable in my hands than Sony because of the awful rolling shutter Sony's produce. Either way I'm adding a gimbal like the Zhyiun Crane because Sony's IBIS doesn't offer enough stabilization for me. Its good to have options.

Cheers

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Kisaha said:

I do want full control and shooting M most of the times, and I do not found the Fuji controls to my liking. It was good some time ago, simulating analog ergonomics, in my opinion is not sufficient for 2016. I love the NX1 ergonomics, if anyone has any experience with it (you can do most things without change your holding) and the Canon C ones for video.

You can set the front and rear command dials to control aperture and shutter speed if you want it to act like most other cameras. I like the fact that the SS is easily locked down with the top dial. I can't count how many times I've changed the SS just moving the camera from shot to shot. The a6300 is two dials short of a complete set of controls - it needs one more on top and a front dial below the shutter, I hate using the goofy dial next to the LCD. I hate Sony's micro record button on the side of the thumb rest too, just let me assign record to the shutter button dammit! The NX1 is nice, I bought one to try and get away from Sony. But they started pulling out of markets and I was concerned I'd never see the lenses I need, so I sold it. The rolling shutter in 4k is also pretty bad, for me better lens selection and a future won out, despite Sony's awful RS numbers. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Another question to the X-T2 users about custom settings...

Does the X-T2 have buttons or something that you can assign for custom settings?  Like you could switch between them easily?

If yes, does it save the Resolution, Shutter and ISO?

With my GH4, I could easily switch between 24P, 60P and 96P just by spinning the custom button wheel. So, I'd like to know if the X-T2 has similar.

Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, SuperSet said:

Another question to the X-T2 users about custom settings...

Does the X-T2 have buttons or something that you can assign for custom settings?  Like you could switch between them easily?

If yes, does it save the Resolution, Shutter and ISO?

With my GH4, I could easily switch between 24P, 60P and 96P just by spinning the custom button wheel. So, I'd like to know if the X-T2 has similar.

The Q menu that's activated by a button on the back of the cam has 7 different memory banks - C1, C2, C3..., and you can just scroll between them with the rear command dial when you hit the Q button. You can assign movie modes to one of the tiles in the Q menu, along with WB settings, film simulation and so on. 

http://fujifilm-dsc.com/en/manual/x-t2/shortcuts/q_button/index.html

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/13/2016 at 6:11 AM, Lothar said:

Occasionally, I use other Film Simulations like Provia or Classic Chrome. And I use a variable ND-Filter to adjust to the highlights with the histogram in photo mode, then I switch to video mode. I usually focus manually, but I also tried auto focus. Right now I just checked with two lenses. With the 18-55 with OIS the autofocus was kind of ok. With the 56 (which is known for slow auto focus) AF was bad, so I focused manually with it.

 

Since it doesn't have a Histogram in video mode, I noticed that I see an exposure meter running down the left side of the screen.  I don't have one yet so I'm only going by the manual's picture so I hope that's accurate. 

Can I use that to set proper exposure?

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 09/11/2016 at 9:05 AM, Lothar said:

It would be mind blowing, but also the end of Fujifilm MILCs, because they would give away their advantage over the competition. Also, there are camera profiles in Lightroom, it still doesn't match the camera's internal raw converter.

Fuji raw file converter ex2(by silkypix) produces identical results from the raw files to the ooc jpgs, identical, but you can then add any film simulation too and correct any exposure issues etc. same colour, etc but generally better nr than the ooc jpg and better detail.

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, kidzrevil said:

@Lothar does Fuji pay you ? You get real defensive about this camera sometimes lol

 

No. I actually don't know what you mean. I sometimes try to explain things which are different with this camera, compared to others. Most of the time I respond to false conclusions about the camera. It definitely has it's downsides like any other camera, too. My intention is to clarify, which means that I don't respond to opinions which are drawn from right assumptions. This might look defensive. Regarding my last post I was just guessing, what kind of people will buy this camera. It's like what kind of people by Macs. But regarding this topic I get really defensive. ;-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

So I again have the camera in my possession and I tend to keep it this time :)

The other options with their pros and cons listed:

  • Panasonic G80 - Great usability and it has IBIS. / Poor skintones, lack of faster 35mm equivalent lens, poor handling of flares. 
  • Canon M5 - Smallest option, esp with the 22mm (its 35mm equiv lens). Great touchscreen AF. / Poor video quality (judging by the 80D's videos).
  • Nikon D750 - Best and most affordable lens selection. Superb colours and tonality. / Bit too big, poor live view AF.
  • Sony A6500 - Touchscreen, IBIS, good affordable APS-C lenses. / I'm betting will have the same crap 1080p and jello 4k as the a6300.

Of course this camera is not without its faults. A lot of the lenses have noisy aperture and/or focusing motors. It doesn't have IBIS or touchscreen. The DR option is disable in video. I think the AF in video mode needs more work. I'm confident its addressable in firmware.

Fuji, if you are listening... Basically we need to be able to have smoother focus racking and an adjustable rack speed. Also we need to be able to use back-button autofocusing when in manual focusing mode (like what is possible in stills). And we need a way to lock the focus whilst adjusting the point. 

 

I plan to skip out of this forum a while now. It's been doing my creativity no good :) I will come back if I have any more tests to show you (here's one and another) or some more artistic footage. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/8/2016 at 7:17 AM, Kisaha said:

I do not see many video professionals going full time Fuji, as of now. Maybe in the next couple of years or so.

Enthusiasts, die hard Fuji funs, and upper-middle class purists and hipsters. There are a lot more specialized users, than let's say, people buying the 700$ Panasonics, or a6xxxx.

The Fuji system is not cheap, it is a notch and a bit more than Sony APS-C, and a lot more than NX and m4/3 (thought, now with the new GH5 and Olympus,  and the 1.2-1.4f lenses the price difference us mininal, or in favor of Fuji), while this is the first truly good camera for people doing 60/40% video, or more. 

The picture profiles, are existed in every image capturing device too, I like Fuji's as well, but it is not so groundbreaking as people suggest. With slight tweeks at post one can achieve similar results, and can use a picture profile, and then add a little bit of something (real super35 film grain?) or even luts.

They still need a few things, but they are going there. I closely follow them and I am excited about every new product, as they seem to be the best listeners in the industry (them, and Panasonic!).

you should avoid watching what the pro's do. There are pro's who still shoot with Canon 5D mark ii & iii

whats the highest usable ISO of the fuji in your opinion ? Also do you notice any macroblocking or artifacting ? @Inazuma

Link to post
Share on other sites

My comment was about the marketing, but also the pragmatic dynamics of the Fuji system, I do still work with these two Canon's (for some reason, a lot of directors are insisting of using these cameras, they do not know any better I guess). The system is not ready yet for full time video work. m4/3 has a GH4(GH5 in the future) and a few other (cheaper) options as a B cam. NX has NX1 and NX500, Sony has a6500 and a7sII e.t.c

Link to post
Share on other sites

@Kisaha I'm just curious: can you produce a shred of evidence that Fuji marketing targets 'die hard Fuji funs [sic], and upper-middle class purists and hipsters'? Concerning your comment about the 'pragmatic dynamics' of the Fuji system, if by that you mean ergonomics, Sony cameras lacking features like touchscreen  and IBIS have been embraced by enthusiasts and professionals alike. In fact, Sony have for a long time now received criticism from even their staunchest supporters, who complain about their convoluted menus, which also falls under the category of ergonomics. Also, whether or not you can 'tweak' the image in post to obtain results similar to the picture profiles in the XT-2 is not the point: the purpose is quick turnaround time, not tinkering around for hours in post. As far as the cost goes - while I'm not a working professional, I really don't consider $1,600 to be outrageous for a refined prosumer flagship camera as good as the XT-2, which some might call a poor man's Leica, though that might be a stretch - I paid more than that for my GH4 almost 3 years ago. Finally, there's the image quality - I haven't been so impressed with the image quality from a mirrorless camera since I don't know when. 

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...