Jump to content

The 4K Fuji X-T2 is here


Recommended Posts

15 hours ago, John_Harrison said:

It doesn't have the same sensor. Fuji sensors are manufactured by Sony, but they are unique (as far as I can tell) to Fuji. Regardless, rolling shutter should be better than the A6300 because of the 1.17 crop when shooting 4K. HD mode should also be a lot better, and I'd imagine it will come pretty close to the A7s crop mode (in terms of quality). That being said I wonder how bad it will be, because the shutter speed seems cranked up in all the video examples (most of which are shot at 30fps anyways). I also think Fuji puts more care in the implementation of features than Sony does, which is evidenced by the 4K crop, and recording limits. 

 

Also where are people hearing that F-Log is HDMI only? I can't seem to find anything about that. 

 

In any case I can't wait to see some real world tests, because right now this camera looks like a serious contender in the world of mirrorless video. 

Fuji's X-Trans sensors have a different color pixel array/ configuration than the Bayer Pattern. Fuji has designed them so as to reduce moiré patterns, without the need for an optical low pass filter (OLPF). I am guessing, that the end results of both of them are very similar. Maybe bayer pattern cameras without the OLPFs are mildly sharper than the X-Trans Sensors. Also, while the read out speed is governed by the sensors (which are made by Sony, btw), if anything, the X-trans would slow the read out speed, if read out speeds are governed by the pixel array. Though they would be by a few micro seconds only, at best.

I am not sure you have understood what helps put 4k and recording limits in place.   
 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 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

Based on current prices, this looks like the situation for 4k shooters in this form-factor... 

£509 - GX80 - nice 4k, IBIS, no overheating, BUT bad rolling shutter, no mic input, crop

£930 - A6300 - nice 4k, AF in video, mic input BUT overheats (lottery), horrible rolling shutter

£1399 - X-T2 - nice 4k, mic input, no overheating(?), who knows? BUT Rolling shutter (how bad?), aliasing (know for this?), bad moiré (known for this?), who knows?

Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Mattias Burling said:

Its their first 4K camera so it can't be known if it has Moire or not. Can't be worse than the A7sii and that's usable.

Didn't the previous Fuji have full sensor readout when it was 1080p? I remember looking at it and thinking it was really a shame that it had a really nice image, yet corrupted due to moiré and aliasing (really bad too)... I hope they fixed that issue. I'm betting just the fact it's 4k will make it better than that previous model. But man, that image seemed so sharp! I hope there's a way to "calm" it down a little.

Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, John Matthews said:

no overheating(?), who knows? BUT Rolling shutter (how bad?), aliasing (know for this?), bad moiré (known for this?), who knows?

I was told, that overheating, aliasing and moiré were the things they were looking at the most when developing the camera. That's why there is this new battery. With vertical grip it should record until the batteries in the grip are dead without overheating (of course at 29:59 it will stop and you have to restart).

Aliasing and moiré (as said) were the main concerns when it came to image quality. Really looking forward to how it will perform in real life.

About rs: <30ms, but that's still very noticeable 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, fuzzynormal said:

 

"Serious" cameras, not serious cameras, who's to say?

It is completely annoying how people can dismiss a camera as not being "serious". They forget these things are tools. If your a serious photographer/videographer you can get an amazing image out of mostly anything on the market

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Super Members
1 minute ago, John Matthews said:

Didn't the previous Fuji have full sensor readout when it was 1080p? I remember looking at it and thinking it was really a shame that it had a really nice image, yet corrupted due to moiré and aliasing (really bad too)... I hope they fixed that issue. I'm betting just the fact it's 4k will make it better than that previous model. But man, that image seemed so sharp! I hope there's a way "calm" it down a little.

Lots of full sensor 1080p cameras have moire. But in general, 4K cameras do pretty well. The NX1 and A7sii had some. The LX100, AX100, BMPC, XC10, etc are clean.

Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, Mattias Burling said:

Lots of full sensor 1080p cameras have moire. But in general, 4K cameras do pretty well. The NX1 and A7sii had some. The LX100, AX100, BMPC, XC10, etc are clean.

I know that it's usually better with 4k, but I saw moiré a few times on the a6300 in normal review footage. I'm thinking this Fuji would be more prone to moiré, given a seemingly sharper image... could be wrong though. It also sounds like Fuji made this a top priority; so, we'll see...

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, MattH said:

It's what it is by definition.  If you increase the bit depth from 8 to 10, you haven't quadrupled the range. You've quadrupled the resolution. Not spacial resoltion, not temporal resolution, but resolution in terms of brightness levels.  Call that what you will. Dynamic resolution seems a good term to me. Certainly more accurate than dynamic range.

As for "soft" 4k.  Take a look at the image from the Canon XC10.

Completely disagree. COLOR bit depth has absolutely nothing to do with resolution !!!!!! So yeah definitely something you just made up & im not even sure how it even vaidates your point. Maybe im missing a huge piece of the puzzle somewhere hidden in your "dynamic resolution" concept. And I've seen sharp xc10 footage as well. 4k is an image that packs 4 times as many pixels than 1080 in the image. This "soft" 4k you look for you'll find it in Narnia or in Alice's wonderland cause it sure doesn't exist in the real world ??

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Brian Williams said:

Here's Gordon Laing-
"I have confirmed that F log will only be on the HDMI output, NOT for in camera recording. A shame since it would be nice to have a flat profile for internal recording even at 4:2:0. Thanks for the tip!"

Such a bummer.

Damn. Well perhaps if Fuji receive feedback that this will cost them a lot of sales they may make a change to the firmware.  They need to understand that the cost of a 4k recorder is no small addition. And its not like we are getting 10 bit with it either.  It gets to the point that people may as well buy a dedicated pro video camera.  For such a small change in firmware they could bring a lot of new people to the system.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, kidzrevil said:

Completely disagree. COLOR bit depth has absolutely nothing to do with resolution !!!!!! So yeah definitely something you just made up & im not even sure how it even vaidates your point. Maybe im missing a huge piece of the puzzle somewhere hidden in your "dynamic resolution" concept. And I've seen sharp xc10 footage as well. 4k is an image that packs 4 times as many pixels than 1080 in the image. This "soft" 4k you look for you'll find it in Narnia or in Alice's wonderland cause it sure doesn't exist in the real world ??

Its funny you put 'color' in capitals. What about a monocrome bitmap image?   You do know that there are different types of resolution than display or image resolution right?

Take this list from wikipedia.  I know it cant match your six exlamation marks, but it's at least a start:

What we are arguing here is merely a question of nomenclature.  We can call it anything, Its still a discrete concept from dynamic range.  If 'dynamic range' is acceptable to denote the maximum range of light intensity recordable, then then number of discrete values with which we can sample this range would clearly be described as a resolution.  And if the word dynamic is good for one, why not the other.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, kidzrevil said:

Well go forth and define it as you may. I still dont get your point nor how this is relative to image quality. I probably never will to be honest and I doubt it bares any significance in this thread anyhow so yeah definitely have fun with that @MattH

It's funny how forcefully you declare that you don't get something.

All in all I agree with getting this back on topic.

Link to post
Share on other sites

@MattH funnier how you still haven't brought a shred of validity to your point. Sorry if it came off as forceful

3 hours ago, Brian Williams said:

Here's Gordon Laing-
"I have confirmed that F log will only be on the HDMI output, NOT for in camera recording. A shame since it would be nice to have a flat profile for internal recording even at 4:2:0. Thanks for the tip!"

Such a bummer.

Hopefully they fix it in a firmware update. Maybe it causes macroblocking in the internal codec and they are trying to avoid that being an issue ?

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Django said:

Agreed.. something really weird about the motion. Will have to wait for real life tests to get a proper idea. Right now it's looking way too 'video'.

Also am I the only one to find Fuji film simulations a bit over rated? Never been a fan of heavy baked in looks.

It is an interesting concept, at least for still photography but the film simulations have nothing a proper LUT would give you imo.

No IBIS, External F-log, Rolling shutter issues, limited/expensive native lens ... meh.. It sounds to me like Fuji is just jumping on the filmmaker bandwagon, but do they really have the chops? I guess it's still nice Sony finds itself a competitor..

Hopefully a real non-sponsored test will give the full breakdown, I certainly won't be the beta tester for yet another compromised new hybrid system.. hyped up solely on the premise of 4K and some "cool" retro picture profiles..

I don't think the film simulations are over-rated at all, they add a whole new dimension to the JPEG output, especially the Acros simulations. On the video side the simulations are a bit over-saturated because the Xpro2, for whatever reason, crushes the blacks on the video recorded image. I can't speak for the X-T2 if this camera also has the same crushed black issue. Of course, this issue is just a matter of raising the blacks, mids, and lowering the highlights. What isn't mentioned in any post I've read on the X-T2 is whether the image tweaks are enabled for video, they aren't on the Xpro2, which would make a huge difference in off-setting the simulations. Those being: Highlight tone, Shadow tone, Color, Sharpness, and Noise reduction controls.

13 hours ago, kidzrevil said:

Dynamic resolution ? Huh ? Did you just make that up ? Lol. Good luck finding "soft" 4K out there

Exactly!

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

@MattH funnier how you still haven't brought a shred of validity to your point. Sorry if it came off as forceful

Hopefully they fix it in a firmware update. Maybe it causes macroblocking in the internal codec and they are trying to avoid that being an issue ?

Sorry, you brought me to this. All I can say is: DUMB ASS!

7 minutes ago, Steve M. said:

 

Exactly!

I answered the question you quoted.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, MattH said:

Sorry, you brought me to this. All I can say is: DUMB ASS!

I answered the question you quoted.

Whatever! I'm not about to argue with all the fancy terminology and all the vast knowledge that is set forth in these posts, because it's not like you, me, or anyone else on this forum is doing anything earth shatteirng in the film industry. Call it what you want Dynamic duo range, Batman and Robin color space, I don't give a shit! This site is ALMOST as bad as No Film School, in terms of everybody is a know-it-all, and everyone else is a dumb ass! 

Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Steve M. said:

Whatever! I'm not about to argue with all the fancy terminology and all the vast knowledge that is set forth in these posts, because it's not like you, me, or anyone else on this forum is doing anything earth shatteirng in the film industry. Call it what you want Dynamic duo range, Batman and Robin color space, I don't give a shit! This site is ALMOST as bad as No Film School, in terms of everybody is a know-it-all, and everyone else is a dumb ass! 

Don't be so defensive then.

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...