Jump to content

Looks like the Fuji X-T20 gets 4K!


Mattias Burling
 Share

Recommended Posts

rs and 8 bit may not be an issue to you but it is to folk who like to go handheld and into heavy grading, you can't just dismiss those factors....both of these are making me hold off on this camera with eyes on the gh5, will wait to see how that unfolds  - I do like the Fuji colours and am sure it's a better stills camera but I'm more weighted towards video

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, ade towell said:

rs and 8 bit may not be an issue to you but it is to folk who like to go handheld and into heavy grading, you can't just dismiss those factors....both of these are making me hold off on this camera with eyes on the gh5, will wait to see how that unfolds  - I do like the Fuji colours and am sure it's a better stills camera but I'm more weighted towards video

The Sony's RS is notorious, but that hasn't prevented professionals all over the world from making breathtakingly beautiful films with it. So, it's a non-issue for me as well. There are those who pixel peep and nitpick, there are those that go out and shoot. Before buying the G85, there were a couple forum members who kept posting horrifying images of ugly oversharpening, monstrous destruction of detail at high ISOs, shitty dynamic range, pukey color (thanks for that, Mattias!); I was half-prepared to ship the camera back as soon as I opened the box. Could this camera really be that bad, I wondered. Anyway, it took me a couple of weeks, but it's shooting beautiful video. And it's comments like that that make me think that the GH5 is more than most of us deserve.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not saying it's a bad camera, I'm just saying besides nicer out of camera colors (which most people then "destroy" with haevy handed LUT usage) it has nothing that an A6300 doesn't have, except it's 400 to 700€ more expensive. I have to agree that you can make great stuff with any camera, since I shoot more than I read forums I actually don't even care about 8bit, I work around rolling shutter and actually never had my Sony overheat since the firmware fix a while back even in the African heat. Never had anyone comment negatively on Sony colors either, also know people shooting with Canon and their dreaded low resolution 1080p with no one ever asking about it, etc.

There's of course no perfect camera. Size, weight, price, codec, bit depth, rolling shutter, sensor size, low light capabilities, lens choice, there's so many factors to pick your poison. I'm just sometimes amused by the fact that we (I include myself) bash one product for shortcomings but are totally fine to accept others, I like the X-T2 (considered getting one as I still have the 23mm 1.4 catching dust, amazing lens) but I'm kinda surprised it is seen as such a strong contender.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Phil A said:

I just can't really understand the exceeding praise for the X-T2 for video to be honest. Yes, the Fuji colors straight out of the camera are nice. It's an amazing camera for photography (except for the X-Trans being sub-optimal with Lightroom). But the rolling shutter is basically the same as NX1/A7s/A7r and everyone hates on these cameras for having "too much" rolling shutter (shooting handheld with the NX1 IS a jello fest). It shoots the same 8bit 4:2:0 footage like the others, it can't even do log internally (and everyone hates on Canon for omitting CLog from cameras). After all this is a 1700€ APS-C camera and I feel like it's just "me too" when it comes to video.

Sometimes this forum baffles me. Some manufacturers get so much more leeway than others.

I kinda get where you're coming from and it puzzles me too.

I am very tempted by the X-T20 with it's form factor and pricing, but I find Fuji face/skin tones to be either too saturated, waxy, or it looks as though the people were drinking and their faces have a shade of pink. For example, in the Fuji Guy's run down video of the X-T20, Billy has a really pink blush. When I look through the other X-T2 videos and the different colour profiles and even for Pro Neg and Classic Chrome, they kind of remind me of the colours from the videos I get from my old Nikon D3100. Not having internal log/flat from the get go is kinda weird. Even Nikon's newest second-last tier APSC camera D5600 also has the flat profile.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Super Members

Its all down to taste. Personally I hated the a6300 with every inch of my body so I don't have to go to the X-T2 to find a camera I like better.
Even a G7 is way better for my needs and that's much much cheaper than a a6300.

My tip, stop being puzzled why people choose gear that you don't like. They are just different :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am also amazed when people use the Sony a6xx cameras for pro work, but it doesn't stop people from doing so.

If I may, I would like to quote Ken Rockwel,

"Versus Fujifilm

Sony and Fuji are completely different from each other:

Ergonomics

Fuji's cameras are designed by and for real photographers. Fuji cameras have far superior ergonomics, with real shutter, aperture, exposure compensation and other dials.

Sony's cameras have the world's worst menu systems, and then they force you to into menus and screens to set the most basic things like ISO and shutter speeds.

Sonys are designed for and by amateurs and online tweakers who don't actually know what's important in a camera.

 

Quality

Fuji, like Canon, makes almost all of its cameras and lenses domestically in Japan.

Sony usually offshores its cameras — even the $3,200 made-in-Thailand A7R II — to whatever country can do it the cheapest."

I couldn't say it better, and maybe that is why I am not earning my life writing about cameras!

The bold line is the essence of the difference, that is why young people and new photo/videographers are fine with that, can't really compare, and the spec war is more important for semi-pro/amateurs, than real everyday use.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, jonpais said:

The Sony's RS is notorious, but that hasn't prevented professionals all over the world from making breathtakingly beautiful films with it. So, it's a non-issue for me as well. There are those who pixel peep and nitpick, there are those that go out and shoot. Before buying the G85, there were a couple forum members who kept posting horrifying images of ugly oversharpening, monstrous destruction of detail at high ISOs, shitty dynamic range, pukey color (thanks for that, Mattias!); I was half-prepared to ship the camera back as soon as I opened the box. Could this camera really be that bad, I wondered. Anyway, it took me a couple of weeks, but it's shooting beautiful video. And it's comments like that that make me think that the GH5 is more than most of us deserve.

and that's one of the many reasons the Sony's don't come into my reckoning...the rs is awful. I get it - for you these are not issues but they are for others - and to stipulate that rs is a 0% issue is just spreading misinformation. And as has been said just because  people have made good films with a camera doesn't mean you're not allowed to discuss any 'issues' said camera may have - is kind of one of the main points of these forums

As for pixel peeping and nitpicking, I'm normally out making a living filming while you're here posting....

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, ade towell said:

and that's one of the many reasons the Sony's don't come into my reckoning...the rs is awful. I get it - for you these are not issues but they are for others - and to stipulate that rs is a 0% issue is just spreading misinformation. And as has been said just because  people have made good films with a camera doesn't mean you're not allowed to discuss any 'issues' said camera may have - is kind of one of the main points of these forums

As for pixel peeping and nitpicking, I'm normally out making a living filming while you're here posting....

 

I shoot every day, post videos and write in my blog weekly. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, jonpais said:

I'm actually happy about the line skipping. Having paid $1,600.00 USD for the X-T2, then to have a model come out with identical video performance for $600.00 less would have made me have buyer's remorse. And then, I might have bought both cameras, and I'd end up in bankruptcy court. :) 

For me it would be a backup as the XT2 is already pretty small and it lacks a battery grip - or it would be a throw in the bag everyday camera with something like the 18mm pancake. I have the 16-55 and 50-140 (though I'm traveling for the rest of the year and not carrying them) and those are much better with the battery grip. When I'm shooting stills or events I have a gripped camera on a sling strap and one on a video monopod.

Cheers

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Trek of Joy said:

For me it would be a backup as the XT2 is already pretty small and it lacks a battery grip - or it would be a throw in the bag everyday camera with something like the 18mm pancake. I have the 16-55 and 50-140 (though I'm traveling for the rest of the year and not carrying them) and those are much better with the battery grip. When I'm shooting stills or events I have a gripped camera on a sling strap and one on a video monopod.

Cheers

I don't have a vast collection like you (yet- I'm working on it!), but I'd think the 16-55 and 50-140 would be too large on this compact camera, no? But sure, with a pancake, alright.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Since I just picked up my second Crane gimbal this evening, I thought I'd share this information. One of the reasons many filmmakers held back on purchasing an X camera, as well as one of the major complaints of online reviewers, was the lack of IBIS. When I searched online for videos shot with the X-T2 and the Crane, I only found a couple, and they were of execrable quality. So I went ahead and tried balancing the X-T2 on the Crane again just now, with the 35mm f/2 lens, and it took me all of 5 minutes to do. So any serious filmmaker who wouldn't consider the Fuji before because of the lack of IBIS alone now has another option. I will post footage sometime next week hopefully. Oh, and I know some will say, but yeah, now it's no longer a $1,600 camera, it'll run $2,200. Well, I think any serious filmmaker should probably have a gimbal in their kit anyhow.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I want to try the X-T2 with a ninja flame for Flog, can anyone suggest a hire company with delivery in the UK? 

So far only found it on 'hirecamera' but its booked out for a while. 

I want to try it out myself, but if anyone can answer these questions?- I have no experience with Fuji.

-How does Flog grade against Slog2? Is the dynamic range and highlight rolloff equivalent?

-With the crop in 4k, how hard is it to get wide angles? What is the Fuji lens range like? 

-How good is the 50/60fps in 1080? Is it equivalent or sharper than in the A6500?

-How good is the colour in flog compared to slog2? - Bearing in mind I don't mind spending time in post...

I just recently got an a6500, just getting to grips with it. I like the dynamic range, and the AF, but not the overall build and ergonomics, and price of lenses. The XT-2 looks looks like it has less jello, perhaps more organic image?   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, pat1 said:

-With the crop in 4k, how hard is it to get wide angles? What is the Fuji lens range like? 

I just recently got an a6500, just getting to grips with it. I like the dynamic range, and the AF, but not the overall build and ergonomics, and price of lenses. The XT-2 looks looks like it has less jello, perhaps more organic image?   

Can't answer most of the stuff but these two.

- Lens choice is second to none, Fuji has the best system of APS-C lenses, especially considering that they have a whole set of f/1.4 lenses. Downside is the focus by wire, but you'll get that with basically all lenses native to the mirrorless systems (helps with autofocus speed).
There's no IBIS and most lenses don't have stabilization either but then none of the two could replace a gimbal or steadicam anyway.

The X-T2 has less jello indeed than the A6500, roughly 30ms vs 39ms, there's still some discussion I think if the boost mode with the battery grip actually helps further. So it's on the same level as for example the A7s II. It's ok and useable but not ideal. The 1080p mode of the NX1 spoiled me completely on that front unfortunately so I can hardly adjust to the A6300 rolling shutter (which is quite good in 1080p on the Sony but the image way worse).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, pat1 said:

I want to try the X-T2 with a ninja flame for Flog, can anyone suggest a hire company with delivery in the UK? 

So far only found it on 'hirecamera' but its booked out for a while. 

I want to try it out myself, but if anyone can answer these questions?- I have no experience with Fuji.

-How does Flog grade against Slog2? Is the dynamic range and highlight rolloff equivalent?

-With the crop in 4k, how hard is it to get wide angles? What is the Fuji lens range like? 

-How good is the 50/60fps in 1080? Is it equivalent or sharper than in the A6500?

-How good is the colour in flog compared to slog2? - Bearing in mind I don't mind spending time in post...

I just recently got an a6500, just getting to grips with it. I like the dynamic range, and the AF, but not the overall build and ergonomics, and price of lenses. The XT-2 looks looks like it has less jello, perhaps more organic image?   

Hi Pat, Here's a comparison between F-log and S-log. Like Phil says, the Fuji lens lineup is pretty awesome. Currently, the widest Fuji lens is the 10-24mm f/4 OIS. 10mm in 4K crop mode is the equivalent of about 17mm in full frame. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, jonpais said:

Hi Pat, Here's a comparison between F-log and S-log. Like Phil says, the Fuji lens lineup is pretty awesome. Currently, the widest Fuji lens is the 10-24mm f/4 OIS. 10mm in 4K crop mode is the equivalent of about 17mm in full frame. 

thanks, I think I saw that comparison but not sure the exposure or something looked right on either camera ?

 

Link to comment
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.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...