Herco

The D810 is a beast of a camera and a professional workhorse pur sang. Depending on which Nikkors you had with that, you will definitely lose some image quality when you move to an APS-C platform like Fuji X. Whether you'll be able to tell, depends on what you do with the images. Printing them poster size at a very good lab, you will be able to tell the difference. Posting on Instagram, A4 prints and viewing on smaller screens, probably not. Landscape and seascape usually involve big contrasts and large dynamic range. Esp. when you aim for interesting light or clouds. Technically a full frame has 1 to 2 stops extra DR, but usually you needn't notice. In post (using Capture One) you'll find that esp. the x-trans sensors have a huge flexibility when it comes to lifting the shadows. Just make sure you don't completely blow-out the highlights. That's why I wouldn't recommend the X-T100/X-T200 for this work considering you're used to a D810. The X-T20/30 have more 'room' in the shadows. If you can still find one, the X-H1 is an absolute briljant camera at the current price. It will also give you the professional feel you're used to with the D810. Alternatives are the X-T2 (second-hand) or X-T3 (on sale). For lenses the 10-24 is absolutely great for landscape/seascape. Don't worry about weather resistance. Just a bit of TLC goes a long way. Prime options are the 12mm from Zeiss, the 14mm and the 16mm f1.4 (though a bit more expensive). The 16-55 is a great allrounder, but the 16mm end is the weakest part of that lens in terms of overall sharpness. It's a reporter lens, less of a landscape lens. On the longer end the 55-200 is very good. The 50-140 too, but quite expensive and for landscape you need less of a fast aperture. For primes you can also take a look at the 60mm (f2.4) or the 80mm. Both are crazy sharp and esp. for the 60mm you can get good second-hand deals.

You definitely are. Happy shooting!

Generally that is very true. However, with the X100-series it's a bit different. The adapter ring fits onto the lens by removing the front ring of the lens and replacing it with the adapter ring. This is a bayonet lock. The adapter ring then holds the filter and lens hood (through a bayonet). There are also lens hoods that screw-in. These can't be connected to the adapter ring but have to be on top of the filter instead. That's inconvenient because when you loosen them, you often also unscrew the filter.

Hi Cillian, with the X-T20 the 16-55 is a bit large and heavy. It defies the purpose of a small compact body. Moreover it's not image stabilized (OIS) and having OIS can be a benefit esp. for anyone new to photography. The 18-135 isn't much smaller than the 16-55 and despite the huge range of focal length it's reasonably good. My recommendation however would be the 18-55 if you have budget and size considerations or the new 16-80 if you can spend a few hundred dollar/euro more. Both are really good in terms of image quality and cover the most used focal lengths. Don't get overly exited about Weather Resistance of the 16-80. The X-T20 isn't so that remains 'the weak spot', but even more important: when you take a bit of care with your set an X-T20 combined with an 18-55 can withstand a light drizzle without problems. If you have one lens, you're not changing lenses outdoors. That's usually the crucial moment for mishaps anyway. WR or not-WR... PS. whenever in the future you decide to a second lens I can recommend the 18-55 teamed up with the 14mm. They share the same filter diameter and are a very compact and awesome travel set. Often undervalued...but the 14mm is almost as good as the famous 16mm/1.4

Third party options of adapter ring that screw onto the lens combined with a good UV- or protection filter work just as good. I believe JJC has a good one. Make sure the optional lens hood works with a bayonet. That's easier than a filter thread screw-in one.

Usually the ambient noise is sufficient to drown out the IBIS noise with the build-in mic, but it's indeed better to use a separate Rode or Fujifilm MIC-ST1 mic. Many of the Fujinon lenses are quite noisy in AF mode. Esp. the older ones. With an external mic it's easier to avoid background noise. The fully articulating screen is for me also the main draw-back (next to new batteries). I recognize it's an advantage for video, but for stills I find the X-H1, T2 and T3 solution to be better for tripods and straps and more discrete for street photography. As Patrick from Fujirumors also noticed: https://www.fujirumors.com/my-first-trip-my-fujifilm-x-t4-what-i-loved-what-i-hated-and-unveiling-what-i-really-teach-at-school/

I recognize the reasoning why to get the X-H1 rather than the X-T4. Having multiple cameras using one battery type is a big bonus and the grip of the X-H1 is indeed much better with the larger lenses. I’ve mounted an L-plate from SmallRig as well.

Indeed an interesting 360°... I recognize the struggle Jazz1. I have an X-H1 and an X-Pro2. However, I’m getting myself used to the idea of swapping my beloved X-Pro2 for an X100V. That makes it a bit more complemetary instead of overlapping.

The battery on the X-H1 is not bad. Just a little worse than the X-T2 due to IBIS. For a day shooting you do need at least one spare though. Or use the battery grip with 2 extra batteries. I guess the X-T4 is better for battery life, but I haven’t tried it long enough to judge. Battery life is best served when you switch off wifi and bluetooth (as I do most of the time). I guess you can get 300-350 shots easily on one battery with the X-H1. The touchscreen in itself works well on the X-H1, but I’ve switched that off as well for most of the time. I’m left-eye dominant, so moving the focus point around with my nose can get annoying 😉 While we’re at it, the IBIS in the X-H1 makes a very faint sound when you’re close to the camera. It’s a fan blowing in the background. Again, barely noticeable when you’re the photographer and inaudiable for the bystanders, but it’s strange to hear for the first time. The X-T4 has a different IBIS system and is silent (at least the one I tried).

I tried the X-T3 for a couple of days, but I prefer the X-H1 because of the build quality, the grip, the shutter and IBIS. The X-T4 is probably a closer call (IBIS, similar shutter and larger battery), but in terms of IQ there’s virtually no difference between the three. AF is better though on the X-T3 and esp. the X-T4. The 80 is a fantastic lens. Razor sharp and great micro contrast. It handles well on an X-H1 with it’s bigger grip. The 16-55 is pro quality and very all-round but should you have some budget left, buying a separate 16/1.4 for (urban) landscape is a great investment. It is visibly better than the 16-55 @16. By the way, a 16-55 combines very good with IBIS on the X-H1 or X-T4. For that lens IBIS is a real benefit (for me at least).

The X-Trans sensors are amongst the best APS-C sensors on the market. The X-H1 is no exception. Obviously, the IQ is exactly the same as all other models with the 24Mp sensor, but IMO there’s also no visible difference with the newer 26Mp sensor. Perhaps except for marginally less noise at high ISO. Which is something to avoid in landscapes anyway... The IBIS in the X-H1 can be an advantage when not using a tripod but that’s just about the only difference with the 24Mp siblings. Having said that, the most important factor will be the lens. Not all Fujinon’s are equal in this. For landscape I can recommend the 14/2.8, the 16/1.4(esp.), 23/1.4 and the 10-24/4. The 16/2.8, 18/2, 18-135 and the 23/2 are less ideal for landscape and architecture. They all suffer from softness and a lack of contrast in the corners and edges. Worst wide open, but also stopped down never reaching the level of the aforementioned. The Zeiss 12/2.8 is very good too. Both standard zooms (the 18-55 and the 16-55) are equally good for landscape. I have no experience with the 16-80 and the 8-16. Another factor is post processing. I prefer Capture One for this. I think it’s superior over all other full-feature solutions I’ve tried incl. Lightroom. Esp. in landscape, you need good details without artefacts, nice contrast and pleasing greens. When using the in-camera jpeg engine, dial-down the sharpening to at least -2 if not more. Fuji tends to have a very agressive sharpening, that esp. affects landscape with small details. It can become unnatural sharp in standard settings. I’ve tried many camera’s as a semi-pro but IMO the only way for landscape to get a better IQ is to go to medium format sensors (e.g. GFX) or to high-resolution fullframe sensors (e.g. A7RIV, Z7, SL2 or S1R) with the best possible glass for that mount. We’re talking about totally difference price points though. Moving to standard resolution fullframe sensors offers only a small improvement in IQ. In fact, a friend of me owning an EOS RP prefers my X-H1 for (urban) landscape. That’s how good the x-system cameras are.

I know that Capture One reads the film simulation you've used while shooting and applies that as standard to the raw when importing. You can always go back to 'pure' raw (either manually per image or as setting in batch mode). I'm not a Lightroom user anymore (for obvious reasons).

The size of the photocells in the 24Mp sensor is approx. 8% larger than in the 26Mp. The gain differs about 20% so there is certainly an advantage for the 26Mp sensor. However, with higher gain there's also slightly higher noise. To correct that, the NR profile of the 26Mp is slightly different. The end result is barely visible in real live low light RAWs (in Capture One). That coincides with the Sony specs for the sensors. Both 24Mp and 26Mp sensor are from Sony and the 26Mp in Fuji is the same sensor as the 61Mp in the A7RIV and in the GFX100. Only cut to a different size.

There's a lot of misconception re. the sensor generations Fuji uses. In essence there's no visible image quality difference between the 24Mp X-TransIII/Processor and the 26Mp X-TransIV/Processor. The 2Mp are negligible. There's virtually no visible difference in low-light performance as well. The BSI (back-side illuminated) technology of the 26Mp sensor has a theoretical advantage here because the metal wiring layer is not on top of the photocells, but beneath them. However, the photocells of the 24Mp are larger and therefor the yield of the 26Mp BSI-sensor is lower than the 24Mp FSI sensor (front-side illuminated). That glitches out almost all advantages here. What does make a difference is the number of AF pixels on the 26Mp sensor (much higher) and the shorter circuits due to the BSI technology of the 26Mp sensor. That allows for greater throughput capacity and quicker AF. Top that with a more powerful processor in the 26Mp camera's and you have snappier AF and higher video bit rates (up to 400 Mbps). The main differences between the x-pro2 (I'm a long-time owner) and the x-pro3 (tried it extensively) are the LCD screen and the viewfinder. The hidden LCD screen could be very beneficial to a street shooter (from the hip). However, imo it sucks to have to open it for menu access and menu access through the EVF is cumbersome when you wear glasses (and have thumbprints all over them). I prefer a screen like the X100V were the user has options to choose how to use it and which is nicely integrated in the body. The sub monitor is imo a useless gadget as there's not backlighting button like on the X-H1/GFX50S. The viewfinder for me is the real dealbreaker on the X-Pro3. Though it is larger and brighter, in OVF mode (which is why I bought the X-Pro) there's only one magnification left (x0.50) rather than the 2 magnification levels of the X-Pro2. That renders the X-Pro3 in OVF mode useless for lenses shorter than 23mm and longer than 35mm. I can't use my 16/18mm and my beloved 50mm anymore on the X-Pro3 in OVF unless I settle with a very tiny frame or frame lines outside my OVF. For now I'm sticking to the X-Pro2.

Hi Jazz1, I have both the x-pro2 and the x-h1. Despite the same sensor/processor inside, these are very different cameras. Also in terms of lenses that match best. The H1 is a very universal camera in true DSLR-style. I use it mainly for studio portraits, fashion and landscape (tilting LCD on the tripod). It easily accommodates the ‘larger’ lenses like the 16-55, the 56 and the 90 and in case of landscape the fast 16 and 23. The Pro2 is much smaller and most of the lenses mentioned above feel very large on the Pro2 and they obstruct the OVF. For that camera I have the f2 primes (23, 35 and 50) as well as the 14mm. I use the Pro2 for street and travel. Of the two it’s my favourite. I’ve always loved the ‘rangefinder-style’. Even though it is sometimes limiting. In that sense they complement each other. The Pro2 invites you to a slower style of photography. I did take a brief look at the Pro3. Technically, the main difference is the more consistent and reliable autofocus (which is the main feature of the 26Mp sensor/processor). Functionally, I have a few problems with the Pro3 compared to the Pro2. The main issue for me is the single magnification of the OVF. That makes it very hard to use the OVF with anything wider than 23mm or longer than 35mm. The Pro2 in OVF mode has a dual magnification that enables anything between 16mm and 56mm. Overall the VF of the Pro3 is better in terms of brightness, size and eyepoint (for people who wear glasses), but the magnification for me is a dealbreaker. Note that if you wear glasses, the H1 viewfinder is generally easier to view as it is bigger and brighter. Another issue for me is the hidden LCD. It’s an extra effort to go into the menus for me. I would have loved an LCD as on the X100V. The small sub screen to me is a useless gadget as there’s no backlit feature like on the H1. Talking about the X100V, I’m tempted to switch my Pro2 for an X100V. It might actually be a better match with the H1. Even less overlap. The main issue of the H1 (apart from battery life) is portability. It’s actually even bigger than a full frame Sony A7. In that sense the X100V might be the best complementary camera to an H1...

Hi Daousz, I'm not sure whether you mean that the X-H1 will be your primary camera (as in: will use it most) or your truly first camera. The X-H1 is a professional grade camera with quite some options, so I can imagine it can be a steep learning curve if it's your first camera. However, there are lots of instruction videos out there. Besides that, the X-H1 is a great camera and my favorite workhorse. I've had an X-Pro1 and now an X-Pro2 which I love for the compactness and style of shooting. However as a workhorse the X-H1 is hard to beat. It replaced my X-T2 (and X-T1 before that) and it has some great advantages over the X-T2 (IBIS, better EVF, great shutter and bluetooth to your phone). It's generally better to grip than the X-Ts (though perhaps a bit less retro-stylish) and it has a very robust build quality. Esp. with bigger lenses like the 16-55 that can be an advantage. Image quality is the same as all 24mp Fuji's and in IMO there's no visible difference with the 26mp Fuji's. The main difference here is that the 26mp BSI-sensors (and processor) allow for faster AF and better eye-AF. For me there's no reason to 'upgrade' to the X-T3 or the X-T4 as I do very little video work. In fact, the X-T4 flippy screen is useless to me as it folds-out sideways. The other option you might consider is an X-E3. Totally different and much smaller form factor, but similar image quality and somewhat easier to operate. There are some great bargains for X-E3s as well. PS. the only issue that the X-H1 has (and the X-T2 and X-E3 far less) is that of battery live. You need to bring at least 2 but better 3 batteries for a day shooting. The IBIS makes it noticeably more power hungry

I’m considering to buy a GFX50. Probably the S. However, I can’t find whether the GFX50 supports linear manual focus. I like to manually focus and I love the linear setting on my X-H1. I see the GFX100 has it, but no word on this in the GFX50 manuals. I fear it’s not there. Anyone able to confirm this? For Fuji it shouldn’t be an issue to add this through a firmware update, right?

My point is that during shooting Fuji auto rotates the display info nicely. During playback, they don't. You either set Autorotate PB to ON and for portrait mode images you have a tiny view, or you set in OFF and the display info stays static and you have to turn the camera between landscape and portrait. Many others use the gyroscope in the camera also during playback to ensure the right-side-up display of the image. That's for me at least the meaning of Autorotate PB ON.

Thanks AndyH44. I found this setting, but it actually disables autorotate in playback. I'd love an autorotate in PB that rotates with how you hold the camera. Like e.g. Sony has...

Most of the lock-ups were fixed in 1.01, 1.11 and 1.12 firmware updates. My first X-H1 locked-up during card write so bad that I swapped back to the X-T2. My current X-H1 doesn't have these issues anymore. However the X-H1 is definitely the stepchild of Fuji's Kaizen philosophy, which is actually really bad as it was introduced as their flagship camera. There hasn't been a meaningful update since 1.5 years and yet there's a long list of things to improve (which can be done through firmware). My most pressing one next to less erratic AF face detect, is automatic re-adjusting shots in portrait mode when played back/reviewing on the LCD. I don't know why on earth Fuji doesn't do that. They support autorotate, but it doesn't work in playback... I do a lot of portrait work in the studio and all other brands but Fuji, seem to support this.

To add to that: DxO claims that their unique noise reduction algorithms would have to be completely rewritten to use the x-trans de-mosaic pattern for Fuji camera's. Which can be a pain as Adobe Lightroom after all these years still shows... As for the darker images, thanks for the explanation Doug. Very helpful to understand what goes on. Many Fuji shooters use the Exposure Compensation (set to +2/3rds of a stop) to correct. I correct images usually and only when needed in post. It's generally easier to recover details in the shadows, than in highlights, so I don't mind a bit darker images.

The Godox V350F and V860II are versatile on-camera flashes when you need occasionally extra light. For macro I believe Godox has a ring flash too. For more serious work (portrait, events et cetera) the Godox V1 is certainly great. My best experience however is with the Profoto A1X. It's more expensive, but has softer, more even light than the V1 and it doesn't run overheated every now and then. Furthermore the A1 works great in a studio setup with e.g. the small B10 or B10plus.

I moved from X-T2 to X-H1 mainly because of IBIS. I love low-light urban landscapes. The X-H1 hasn't disappointed me. I compared it with the X-T3 and the H1 handles much better. Feels more robust, better shutter and better grip. A big unexpected plus for me was the linear manual focus setting on the H1 that the T2 and my x-Pro2 don't have. It allows you to manually focus in a linear mode for a more consistent feel... And by the way the 3.7mio EVF is superior over the X-T2 EVF with 2.3mio pixels

My shortlist: Chris and Jordan from DPReview, bigheadtaco, Denae & Andrew, Dustin Abbott, Ted Forbes (Art of...) and grandmaster Hugh Brownstone (3bmep). For inspiration I turn to Ted Vieira... not so short list after all and the common denominator is that they refrain from "awesome", "epic" and "I have more gear than God"... 😉 adding Gordon Laing to my long list...

Let me first introduce myself. 57 years and amateur photographer since the age of 12, although with intervals. My passion lies with portrait, fashion, street and urban landscape. All stills photography, almost no video. I started with an Olympus OM1 (which I still have and occasionally use) but have been around the block: from Olympus to Nikon to Pentax to Minolta to Canon and Leica. I took a few years off of photography, until someone lend me his X-Pro1 for a day. It reminded me of my M6 and M8. The X-Pro1 was far from perfect. However the camera grew on me and the image quality was so beautiful that it kept me wanting to shoot more. When the X-Pro2 came along I immediately upgraded and after a year or so I added an X-T2, which later on I swapped for an X-H1. The X-H1 is a bit big for Fuji standards, but after the EOS 5D its a breeze. In the meanwhile I own 9 XF lenses. Mostly primes, but also the 16-55 (hence the X-H1 for its IBIS). 90mm is the longest focal length I need (and have). For me the X-H1 also marks the transition point of Fujifilm. From this point onwards Fuji started to lose me. Let me explain. First of all next to the X-T10/20/30 Fuji launched the X-T100/200 line rendering the beautiful X-E line redundant and from what I hear, repealed soon. I understand the commercial viability of video capabilities and a DSLR-style over a rangefinder-style, but speaking of crowded market segments... Next to that Fuji launched the X-T3 only a few months after introducing the X-H1. I would have understood this if the hybrid X-H1 had the 26Mp sensor soon followed by the X-T3 with a similar sensor. But cannibalizing a flagship model within half a year or so, dramatically drop its price and discard of any meaningful firmware update for more than 1.5 years, is an insult to buyers. That kind of corporate behaviour is what we previously accused Nikon, Canon and Sony for, but they’ve bettered their lifes. It seems that history is repeating itself with the new X-T4 versus the X-T3. In a few years Fuji went from “video as an after-thougth” to “video-first”. There’s little progress in the X-T4 when it comes to stills. You could even say some degress: the fully articulating screen is not for stills photographers. Occasionally ‘killing your darlings’ is part of progress, but this almost feels like leaving a group of customers behind. In the meanwhile Fuji also launched the X-Pro3. I can dig dropping the d-pad and the reversed tilted screen. The titanium top- and bottom plates are a nice touch, but add little to the quality of the camera. What I can’t understand is getting rid of the dual magnification for the OVF. That renders any lens wider than 23mm or longer than 50mm useless in combination with the OVF, which is the main attraction of the X-Pro3. Leica already understood this decades ago... Probably Fuji’s best matured camera is the X100V. The style, new lens and tilted screen has defined today’s ultimate street camera. In fact I even consider swapping my beloved X-Pro2 for an X100V. The X100V shows that clearly defining a product line and improve and innovate on a regular basis is a better strategy than creating new and mixing existing product lines. It also makes it easier to maintain a stable pricing strategy. My hope is now on the X-H2 to restore ratio in Fuji’s product line-up and break with the recent ‘video-first’ mantra. However, considering the X-H was meant to be the hybrid stills/video camera, I fear the worst. I guess I’m part of a dying breed but Fuji please don’t make me want to buy an A7R...