Thanks :)

Yup. They only had to wait a couple of months for the X-Trans IV too, which makes it even more unfortunate. I think the X-T4 was meant to be the X-H2, but was switched back to X-T kind of body after the X-H1's flop. I think it would have made more sense as an X-H camera than X-T, with its flippy screen and all of that.

​@@uncertainrelease True. I feel the X-T4 was just a stop gap arrangement and a test bed to get the ibis unit into an X-T body. Would really like to hear your experience and feedback on the ergos of the X-H2S. I have the sdQuattro, used to have the X-H1 and now settled on the X-H2S. I like your viewpoints on camera design.😊 Keep up the great work!

@@JoaquimGonsalves The X-H2S is nice. I would have probably looked into the X-H2 if I didn't leave Fuji for my main system (as I use a PSAM camera now anyway). Grip is decent, button placement is good and size is kept in check. I would hve preferred a retro disl setup like the X-H1 had, but hey this is good enough. I tested it in a store, it seemed like an excellent camera, but I couldn't help myself noticing the way to change the ISO was a bit cumbersome.

​@@uncertainrelease that's great to hear! Enjoy the Nikon. They make really great bodies ergonomically. Yeah the XH2 is quite a far way ahead from the XH1. True about the ISO. Personally would have loved a third dial a la Canon, on the body but for now its good enough. I don't like their new joystick though. I like the materials used on it, better than the older bodies, but the electronics coupled to it are over sensitive. And of course Fuji's AF issues. Other than that, I love the XH2S. The image quality is excellent for my use cases in both photo and video.

@@JoaquimGonsalves The most important part is that you are satisfied with your gear ! Everything else is superfluous :D

In what software are you processing your files? X-Trans RAWs generally don't like Lightroom and will require software like Capture One to extract the full potential. The low light of the X-H1 is leagues ahead of the D700 (I know, I have both), and the old 18MP sensor in the 70D really isn't on the same level either. Pretty sure the 16MP chip in the G7 is also weaker on pretty much every front. I've used Fujifilm cameras for 3+ years and I've never had problems in low light, do you have some noise reduction applied (the NR setting in the quick menu). Always have that at -4 otherwise the camera will start softening thing pretty heavily at higher ISOs and you loose detail. Your comment about eh field of gradd is typically the kind of thing that would happen in a software that isn't really adapting X-Trans properly. For years Fujifilm cameras had problems in lightroom with everything green (grass, foliage,...) Focus peakinf is very accurate on the X-H1, be sure to set it to low instead of high and using the videfinder instead of the back screen (the back screen doesn't have that great of a resolution and it can get confused with peaking) I cannot comment on metering, I've never used it on any of my Fujifilm cameras. Having the live exposure view in the EVF makes it easy to simply use full manual mode. Also the files are flexible enough with more than enough dynamic range to allow for a lot of processing in post.

@@uncertainrelease I've used capture one, affinity photo, darktable and rawtherapee. Noise reduction might be part of it as it's set to zero by default. My focus peaking is set to high so I will try low. I use the viewfinder most of the time. I'm mostly a street shooter and shot a lot in manual but when there's very contrasty conditions and frequently changing light I use the metering and auto iso to enable me to act quickly to potential shots especially when moving between bright areas and cover and it doesn't seem to be as accurate as my other cameras. In every case I get better shots from my other cameras. I've often wondered if I have issues with the sensor TBF but haven't had the chance to try another copy. There's been cases where the light is fine, iso is 800 or below but have had the muddiest images. Random question actually but if you look at your sensor can you see a smaller rectangle within the main sensor? I've looked at images online and haven't seen that on others and wonder if there's an issue with the sensor surface

@@souldigital8148 the square in the middle of the sensor is where the phase detection points are, I have that as well on both my X-H1 and X-T2. if NR is set to 0, then there is some applied. You need to go to -4 to remove all of it. havving muddier images under ISO 800 is also "normal" as this is where the second base ISO kicks in

Haha I don't deny it. Though to be completely honest, if I didn't have a D700 and a pile of F mount glass, I would have never sold the X-H1. I'm just trying to simplify my kit which has been growing quite hard these past few months (I'll admit I do have lens GAS happily)

The X-H1 is a terrrific camera to be honest. And it's a real good value too. As I said in the video, I have a few niggles with the X-H1, some small details that kind of detracts from the experience, but I have those with every camera. The X-H1 is one of those cameras that came hella close to being perfection for me. I hope you'll enjoy it ! It can be a real performer if you sit down and take the time to learn it properly.

worming shows up when pushing the sharpening slider a little too far. My version or LR is a little bit older, I know that newer versions deal better with this. I still found Capture One to deal with X-Trans files a bit better. There's a plugin made for LR to get basically on par with C1 that costs around 40 USD, but I wasn't going to pay that.

I compared that to my Nikon cameras. ISO 12800 on my X-H1 was pretty much the same exposure (using the same exposure parameters as well, so same aperture, same lens, same shutter speed) as ISO 6400 on my Z6. I didn't compare with other brand like Canon or Sony (since I don't have cameras of those brands), but this stayed true for all my Nikon cameras, whatever the ISO range or the range : the Fuji at the same ISO was always about 1 stop darker (cameras tested : Nikon Z6, Nikon D700, Nikon D300, Nikon D60, Nikon D2X. I didn't bother testing it with my D2H and D1X). Unless you want to argue that ISO 6400 on my Nikons is ISO 25600 in reality? I don't think that's accurate at all.

@@uncertainrelease That's correct, ISO 12800 on Fuji (SOS) will be somewhere around 6400 on Nikon (REI). What you're saying is Fuji "lying" about their ISO, while in reality Fuji, like Pentax/Ricoh and Olympus are using more objective measuring system - SOS. So Nikon 6400 (REI) will be closer to 12800 (SOS), ISO 64 will be closer to 125. Though with REI we can't really tell what the real ISO is, since that measuring system allows manufacturers to show whatever they want. So your "Fuji lying about their ISO" would better suit manufacturers, which are using REI like Nikon.

@@MikeRinz I get you, but the thing is, there are more manufacturers doing the REI thing than manufacturers doing the SOS thing. Worse, those that are using REI are all the largest companies and the most represented. The definition of REI is variable, but they all land in the same ballpark when it comes to exposure. So even though SOS is a more "accurate" way to do ISO sensitivitites, the fact of the matter is that most people are used to the REI "standard" rather than SOS. When you say that you took your shot at ISO 12800, but what you're getting on SOS cameras is about 1 stop darker than REI cameras, then you feel a little bit cheated. You feel like on the spec sheet you read something that wasn't what you expected (again, because the huge majority of users are using REI and not SOS). Nobody is lying there, I was talking about my feeling as a user. It's important to separate both. When you see "top native ISO : 12800" on the spec sheet but you get the same results as if it was ISO 6400, I think there are grounds to be a little bit dissapointed, don't you think? As for the companies themselves, they are not lying or anything like that, but there is a lack of transparency about this, mostly because everything is buried in tech babble that pretty much nobody pays attention to.

@@uncertainrelease Wish digital ISO was just abandoned and represented in gain instead.

@@MikeRinz yeah, that or everybody taking the same standard (SOS seems to be the obvious answer), but I guess we can wait a ton...