Another sunset shot at Indian River Inlet, DE.  Nothing special, just liked the sky.  Handheld, no editing.  X-T5, around 16mm I think. lol.

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

two shots across Assawoman Bay, looking toward Ocean City, MD......AUG25 Supermoon Rising.  One is super compressed (150-600, 539mm), one wide (16-80, 23mm).  Both X-T5.

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

It seems you are dragging up old stuff that has been known for some time. It is stated in the specs the video is recorded in 10 bits: X-H2S @ 4:2:2 10-bit internal recording X-T4 @ 4:2:0 10-bit internal recording The 4:2:2 gives better color space results. The big video advantage for the X-H2S has been faster readout, being able to use external hdmi capture devices and 6K video capture. There is a fairly good video that has been around for a while discussing F-Log2 vs F-log: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8kDlhiEOAus p.s. Welcome to the forum.  

Fantastic!

Is the X-H2S “dynamic range improvement” a myth? Since the release of the Fujifilm X-H2S, Fuji has heavily promoted: the sensor’s internal 14-bit readout, the new F-Log2 profile, and a supposedly tangible improvement in video dynamic range compared to previous generations (X-T4, X-S20, etc.). But when you look at actual laboratory measurements, the narrative starts to fall apart. What the numbers actually show (measured data, not marketing) Based on IMATEST / SNR-style measurements: X-H2S ≈ 12.2 stops at SNR=2 ≈ 13.6 stops at SNR=1 Measured in ProRes HQ, high native ISO (1250) X-T4 ≈ 11.8 stops at SNR=2 ≈ 13.4 stops at SNR=1 Measured in H.264 / H.265, lower native ISO (800) The real-world difference is about 0.2 to 0.4 stop, depending on the threshold used. This is nowhere near a generational leap. The core question: where did the 14-bit promise go? If the X-H2S sensor is truly read internally at 14-bit, a simple question arises: Why does this extra bit depth not translate into a measurable increase in usable dynamic range? Because: the final recorded signal is still 10-bit, read noise appears to cap the signal before those extra bits can matter, SNR curves remain very close to those of the X-T4. In short: 14-bit upstream, same ceiling downstream. And what about F-Log2? F-Log2 is supposed to: extend highlight latitude, better exploit the sensor signal. Yet in practice: measured dynamic range barely increases, what we mostly see is curve redistribution, not actual expansion, shadow noise rises earlier. This raises a legitimate concern: Are we just looking at a remapping of the same dynamic range, rather than a true physical gain? Provisional conclusion (but an uncomfortable one) Based on the available data: the X-H2S “dynamic range improvement” appears largely overstated, the 14-bit readout looks more like a theoretical talking point than a measurable benefit, F-Log2 seems primarily like a grading convenience, not a sensor-level breakthrough. Open but serious question Is the internal 14-bit sensor readout and F-Log2, in practice, a damp squib with no truly palpable impact on real-world video dynamic range? If anyone has: independent measurements showing otherwise, or a demonstrable gain beyond ~0.3 stop, I’m genuinely interested. But for now, the numbers simply do not support the narrative.

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!