He’s wrong about all of it and I seriously doubt he used the camera.
I had the X-T3, sold it for the X-T4, and 2 years later I preordered the X-H2s. I have had it since launch and here’s a quick rebuttals to that garbage review.
First, the people he spoke about, saying they backed up his claims…
Casey from Camera Conspiracies, only tried the pre-release and has since taken one on loan… He loves the thing now.
Gerald from Gerald Undone, said the camera’s DR is excellent, Still image capture AF is awesome, and he said thanks to the noise properties he can actually make the video better quality than the A1 (that’s impressive).
DPReview, said they wouldn’t rank the camera or comment on most aspects until they got a full retail version of it and that review is happening now.
Second, he ignored the stacked sensor and the improved AF speed completely. Then he made assumptions based on his ignorance of the camera and how it functions. He claimed they didn’t think the design through, but his own complaints show he didn’t think it through.
I had the X-T4 sitting right beside the new body for about a week… The build quality was very much on par with the X-T4 and yet he praised one while panning the other. So which is it, is the build quality of the X-T4 cheap, or is the X-H2S actually decent build quality.
Then of course he tried to equate knowing the X-T4 with knowing this camera and I can tell you they could not be further apart in the way they operate and still be a Fuji body.
Many of us have action photos, portraits, BIF, and animal portraits, yet he seems to proclaim it is the worst camera ever.
Of course he focused on 1 thing obsessively, that’s the fact that the dials don’t have any push button capabilities. Then he also made a comment that gave away his motivation for the whole review away… Fuji wouldn’t give him a body to review, so he rented or purchased one and panned the whole camera.
Oh and as for Muddy images… I set both the X-H2S and the X-T4 to the same settings and swapped the lenses from body to body. The image quality was pretty much identical, so you can ignore that garbage claim too.