Why is the X-E2 video-challenged (or is it)?

Started 9 months ago | Discussions
romrom
New MemberPosts: 22
Like?
Why is the X-E2 video-challenged (or is it)?
9 months ago

I heard that the X-E2 is an excellent camera for stills, but that it is lackluster as far as video is concerned. Two questions:
1. Is the camera's video mediocre in absolute terms or is it just poor compared to a decent video camera? What is wrong with it, exactly? Poor low-light, camera shake, slow focus etc?
2. What I don't understand is if a camera has an excellent lens, a nice large sensor and a powerful processor, why shouldn't it have decent video? Technologically speaking, how can it be that a camera is superb at stills, but poor at video? Can someone explain how that works?  Is this something that can be solved with a firmware update?

(OK, I know that is more than two questions, sorry)

Fujifilm X-E2
If you believe there are incorrect tags, please send us this post using our feedback form.
unknown member
(unknown member)
Like?
Re: Why is the X-E2 video-challenged (or is it)?
In reply to romrom, 9 months ago

romrom wrote:

I heard that the X-E2 is an excellent camera for stills, but that it is lackluster as far as video is concerned. Two questions:
1. Is the camera's video mediocre in absolute terms or is it just poor compared to a decent video camera? What is wrong with it, exactly? Poor low-light, camera shake, slow focus etc?
2. What I don't understand is if a camera has an excellent lens, a nice large sensor and a powerful processor, why shouldn't it have decent video? Technologically speaking, how can it be that a camera is superb at stills, but poor at video? Can someone explain how that works? Is this something that can be solved with a firmware update?

(OK, I know that is more than two questions, sorry)

I have read that x-trans just isn't ever going to be great for video for reasons I can't explain but have read several times.

Not sure I believe it when I hear Fuji don't care about video - I think if they could add stellar video they would, but I don't think it's very high on their priorities tbh.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
romrom
New MemberPosts: 22
Like?
Re: Why is the X-E2 video-challenged (or is it)?
In reply to stimpy, 9 months ago

stimpy wrote:

romrom wrote:

I heard that the X-E2 is an excellent camera for stills, but that it is lackluster as far as video is concerned. Two questions:
1. Is the camera's video mediocre in absolute terms or is it just poor compared to a decent video camera? What is wrong with it, exactly? Poor low-light, camera shake, slow focus etc?
2. What I don't understand is if a camera has an excellent lens, a nice large sensor and a powerful processor, why shouldn't it have decent video? Technologically speaking, how can it be that a camera is superb at stills, but poor at video? Can someone explain how that works? Is this something that can be solved with a firmware update?

(OK, I know that is more than two questions, sorry)

I have read that x-trans just isn't ever going to be great for video for reasons I can't explain but have read several times.

Not sure I believe it when I hear Fuji don't care about video - I think if they could add stellar video they would, but I don't think it's very high on their priorities tbh.

I kinda wanted specifics, but is it even worse than video taken with, say, a Galaxy S4 or other smartphone?

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Al Valentino
Senior MemberPosts: 4,365Gear list
Like?
Re: Why is the X-E2 video-challenged (or is it)?
In reply to romrom, 9 months ago

I have the XE1 and cannot say the quality is bad at all. The problem is more about focusing and keeping focus on moving subjects. Not a problem with manual lenses or manual focusing. But I am not the best person to address this since I rarely use it - and my camera is the older model.

-- hide signature --

Fuji XE1 w/14, 18-55, 55-200, Rokinon 8mm Fisheye & Tamron 90mm f/2.8 Macro

 Al Valentino's gear list:Al Valentino's gear list
Fujifilm X-E1 Fujifilm XF 35mm F1.4 R Fujifilm XF 14mm F2.8 R Fujifilm XF 18-55mm F2.8-4 R LM OIS Fujifilm XF 55-200mm F3.5-4.8 R LM OIS +8 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
unknown member
(unknown member)
Like?
Re: Why is the X-E2 video-challenged (or is it)?
In reply to romrom, 9 months ago

romrom wrote:

stimpy wrote:

romrom wrote:

I heard that the X-E2 is an excellent camera for stills, but that it is lackluster as far as video is concerned. Two questions:
1. Is the camera's video mediocre in absolute terms or is it just poor compared to a decent video camera? What is wrong with it, exactly? Poor low-light, camera shake, slow focus etc?
2. What I don't understand is if a camera has an excellent lens, a nice large sensor and a powerful processor, why shouldn't it have decent video? Technologically speaking, how can it be that a camera is superb at stills, but poor at video? Can someone explain how that works? Is this something that can be solved with a firmware update?

(OK, I know that is more than two questions, sorry)

I have read that x-trans just isn't ever going to be great for video for reasons I can't explain but have read several times.

Not sure I believe it when I hear Fuji don't care about video - I think if they could add stellar video they would, but I don't think it's very high on their priorities tbh.

I kinda wanted specifics, but is it even worse than video taken with, say, a Galaxy S4 or other smartphone?

Why don't you look at samples, several on youtube.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Sal Baker
Veteran MemberPosts: 7,704Gear list
Like?
Re: Why is the X-E2 video-challenged (or is it)?
In reply to romrom, 9 months ago

romrom wrote:

stimpy wrote:

romrom wrote:

I heard that the X-E2 is an excellent camera for stills, but that it is lackluster as far as video is concerned. Two questions:
1. Is the camera's video mediocre in absolute terms or is it just poor compared to a decent video camera? What is wrong with it, exactly? Poor low-light, camera shake, slow focus etc?
2. What I don't understand is if a camera has an excellent lens, a nice large sensor and a powerful processor, why shouldn't it have decent video? Technologically speaking, how can it be that a camera is superb at stills, but poor at video? Can someone explain how that works? Is this something that can be solved with a firmware update?

(OK, I know that is more than two questions, sorry)

I have read that x-trans just isn't ever going to be great for video for reasons I can't explain but have read several times.

Not sure I believe it when I hear Fuji don't care about video - I think if they could add stellar video they would, but I don't think it's very high on their priorities tbh.

I kinda wanted specifics, but is it even worse than video taken with, say, a Galaxy S4 or other smartphone?

The video quality is actually very good, it's full 1080p (even at 60fps) at about the same bit rate as the Canon 5DII which has been used for cinema and HD TV episodes.  Like the 5DII when it first launched, it lacks a few manual controls that higher end shooters require but most people wouldn't miss. I would need it to have manual shutter angle control and broadcast compliant frame rates like 24p.  Canon added manual controls, frame rates, etc. in one FW update.  Since the X-E2 has a fast processor and can do 60fps it has the throughput to handle what the older 5DII could.  Maybe Fuji will do a similar FW upgrade.

The bigger issue with all DSLR video options is not the sensor technology, it's the method used to downsize large MP frames to 2mp per frame at 30 60 times per second on the fly.  Most cameras use a line removal algorithm to downsize the frames but this creates moire with typical moire inducing textures/objects.  Now we have large format dedicated pro video cameras so DSLR options are not as attractive As they used to be.  The large format video cameras are either APS or FF in size for DOF advantages, but the sensors produce images at the native frame size of the HD format.  No downsizing is needed so the video quality is much cleaner.

The 5DII had noticeable moire on moire inducing subjects.  But this was rare, and like with other DSLR video cameras, one learns to work around it and produce stunning footage.

Rolling shutter is another issue with all CMOS sensors.  Some are better some are worse.  Some editing programs can illuminate the rolling shutter affect.  I haven't tested the X-E2 for that yet, I've been having too much fun shooting still images.

Sal

 Sal Baker's gear list:Sal Baker's gear list
Canon EOS 5D Mark II Canon EOS 350D Fujifilm X-E2 Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 USM Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 USM +5 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Sal Baker
Veteran MemberPosts: 7,704Gear list
Like?
Re: Why is the X-E2 video-challenged (or is it)?
In reply to stimpy, 9 months ago

stimpy wrote:

romrom wrote:

stimpy wrote:

romrom wrote:

I heard that the X-E2 is an excellent camera for stills, but that it is lackluster as far as video is concerned. Two questions:
1. Is the camera's video mediocre in absolute terms or is it just poor compared to a decent video camera? What is wrong with it, exactly? Poor low-light, camera shake, slow focus etc?
2. What I don't understand is if a camera has an excellent lens, a nice large sensor and a powerful processor, why shouldn't it have decent video? Technologically speaking, how can it be that a camera is superb at stills, but poor at video? Can someone explain how that works? Is this something that can be solved with a firmware update?

(OK, I know that is more than two questions, sorry)

I have read that x-trans just isn't ever going to be great for video for reasons I can't explain but have read several times.

Not sure I believe it when I hear Fuji don't care about video - I think if they could add stellar video they would, but I don't think it's very high on their priorities tbh.

I kinda wanted specifics, but is it even worse than video taken with, say, a Galaxy S4 or other smartphone?

Why don't you look at samples, several on youtube.

Youtube is probably the last place to do a critical evaluation of video quality, particularly video bandwidth and compression algorythems.  Downloading some uncompressed native footage would be the best way to assess HD video quality.

Sal

 Sal Baker's gear list:Sal Baker's gear list
Canon EOS 5D Mark II Canon EOS 350D Fujifilm X-E2 Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 USM Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 USM +5 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
romrom
New MemberPosts: 22
Like?
Re: Why is the X-E2 video-challenged (or is it)?
In reply to Sal Baker, 9 months ago

Sal Baker wrote:

romrom wrote:

stimpy wrote:

romrom wrote:

I heard that the X-E2 is an excellent camera for stills, but that it is lackluster as far as video is concerned. Two questions:
1. Is the camera's video mediocre in absolute terms or is it just poor compared to a decent video camera? What is wrong with it, exactly? Poor low-light, camera shake, slow focus etc?
2. What I don't understand is if a camera has an excellent lens, a nice large sensor and a powerful processor, why shouldn't it have decent video? Technologically speaking, how can it be that a camera is superb at stills, but poor at video? Can someone explain how that works? Is this something that can be solved with a firmware update?

(OK, I know that is more than two questions, sorry)

I have read that x-trans just isn't ever going to be great for video for reasons I can't explain but have read several times.

Not sure I believe it when I hear Fuji don't care about video - I think if they could add stellar video they would, but I don't think it's very high on their priorities tbh.

I kinda wanted specifics, but is it even worse than video taken with, say, a Galaxy S4 or other smartphone?

The video quality is actually very good, it's full 1080p (even at 60fps) at about the same bit rate as the Canon 5DII which has been used for cinema and HD TV episodes. Like the 5DII when it first launched, it lacks a few manual controls that higher end shooters require but most people wouldn't miss. I would need it to have manual shutter angle control and broadcast compliant frame rates like 24p. Canon added manual controls, frame rates, etc. in one FW update. Since the X-E2 has a fast processor and can do 60fps it has the throughput to handle what the older 5DII could. Maybe Fuji will do a similar FW upgrade.

The bigger issue with all DSLR video options is not the sensor technology, it's the method used to downsize large MP frames to 2mp per frame at 30 60 times per second on the fly. Most cameras use a line removal algorithm to downsize the frames but this creates moire with typical moire inducing textures/objects. Now we have large format dedicated pro video cameras so DSLR options are not as attractive As they used to be. The large format video cameras are either APS or FF in size for DOF advantages, but the sensors produce images at the native frame size of the HD format. No downsizing is needed so the video quality is much cleaner.

The 5DII had noticeable moire on moire inducing subjects. But this was rare, and like with other DSLR video cameras, one learns to work around it and produce stunning footage.

Rolling shutter is another issue with all CMOS sensors. Some are better some are worse. Some editing programs can illuminate the rolling shutter affect. I haven't tested the X-E2 for that yet, I've been having too much fun shooting still images.

Sal

Sal, thanks for the detailed response! What about focusing speed? The only thing I really noticed in the sample videos on YouTube is that it seemed to take a second or two for the video to shift focus from one subject to another (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Idaa5UrHnDQ&feature=youtu.be at around the 20 second mark), which I think is unacceptable. Not sure why it should be that sluggish, though.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Sal Baker
Veteran MemberPosts: 7,704Gear list
Like?
Re: Why is the X-E2 video-challenged (or is it)?
In reply to romrom, 9 months ago

romrom wrote:

Sal Baker wrote:

romrom wrote:

stimpy wrote:

romrom wrote:

I heard that the X-E2 is an excellent camera for stills, but that it is lackluster as far as video is concerned. Two questions:
1. Is the camera's video mediocre in absolute terms or is it just poor compared to a decent video camera? What is wrong with it, exactly? Poor low-light, camera shake, slow focus etc?
2. What I don't understand is if a camera has an excellent lens, a nice large sensor and a powerful processor, why shouldn't it have decent video? Technologically speaking, how can it be that a camera is superb at stills, but poor at video? Can someone explain how that works? Is this something that can be solved with a firmware update?

(OK, I know that is more than two questions, sorry)

I have read that x-trans just isn't ever going to be great for video for reasons I can't explain but have read several times.

Not sure I believe it when I hear Fuji don't care about video - I think if they could add stellar video they would, but I don't think it's very high on their priorities tbh.

I kinda wanted specifics, but is it even worse than video taken with, say, a Galaxy S4 or other smartphone?

The video quality is actually very good, it's full 1080p (even at 60fps) at about the same bit rate as the Canon 5DII which has been used for cinema and HD TV episodes. Like the 5DII when it first launched, it lacks a few manual controls that higher end shooters require but most people wouldn't miss. I would need it to have manual shutter angle control and broadcast compliant frame rates like 24p. Canon added manual controls, frame rates, etc. in one FW update. Since the X-E2 has a fast processor and can do 60fps it has the throughput to handle what the older 5DII could. Maybe Fuji will do a similar FW upgrade.

The bigger issue with all DSLR video options is not the sensor technology, it's the method used to downsize large MP frames to 2mp per frame at 30 60 times per second on the fly. Most cameras use a line removal algorithm to downsize the frames but this creates moire with typical moire inducing textures/objects. Now we have large format dedicated pro video cameras so DSLR options are not as attractive As they used to be. The large format video cameras are either APS or FF in size for DOF advantages, but the sensors produce images at the native frame size of the HD format. No downsizing is needed so the video quality is much cleaner.

The 5DII had noticeable moire on moire inducing subjects. But this was rare, and like with other DSLR video cameras, one learns to work around it and produce stunning footage.

Rolling shutter is another issue with all CMOS sensors. Some are better some are worse. Some editing programs can illuminate the rolling shutter affect. I haven't tested the X-E2 for that yet, I've been having too much fun shooting still images.

Sal

Sal, thanks for the detailed response! What about focusing speed? The only thing I really noticed in the sample videos on YouTube is that it seemed to take a second or two for the video to shift focus from one subject to another (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Idaa5UrHnDQ&feature=youtu.be at around the 20 second mark), which I think is unacceptable. Not sure why it should be that sluggish, though.

I've never tried the AF with video.  For commercial and documentary work video is always manual focus.  The problem with the 5DII was the LCD was the only option for seeing the video, so I used a magnifying viewer attached to the LCD so I could get my eye up close to the LCD to see focus.  And there were no focus aids.

The nice thing about mirrorless, like the x-E2, is you can hold the EVF to your eye and see everything.  This is much more like a real video camera.  Like I said, all Fuji has to do is upgrade their FW to add needed manual controls and the X cameras will be an attractive video option.  It's just not ready for prime time yet.

Sal

 Sal Baker's gear list:Sal Baker's gear list
Canon EOS 5D Mark II Canon EOS 350D Fujifilm X-E2 Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 USM Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 USM +5 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
RicksAstro
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,416Gear list
Like?
Re: Why is the X-E2 video-challenged (or is it)?
In reply to romrom, 9 months ago

romrom wrote:

Sal Baker wrote:

romrom wrote:

stimpy wrote:

romrom wrote:

I heard that the X-E2 is an excellent camera for stills, but that it is lackluster as far as video is concerned. Two questions:
1. Is the camera's video mediocre in absolute terms or is it just poor compared to a decent video camera? What is wrong with it, exactly? Poor low-light, camera shake, slow focus etc?
2. What I don't understand is if a camera has an excellent lens, a nice large sensor and a powerful processor, why shouldn't it have decent video? Technologically speaking, how can it be that a camera is superb at stills, but poor at video? Can someone explain how that works? Is this something that can be solved with a firmware update?

(OK, I know that is more than two questions, sorry)

I have read that x-trans just isn't ever going to be great for video for reasons I can't explain but have read several times.

Not sure I believe it when I hear Fuji don't care about video - I think if they could add stellar video they would, but I don't think it's very high on their priorities tbh.

I kinda wanted specifics, but is it even worse than video taken with, say, a Galaxy S4 or other smartphone?

The video quality is actually very good, it's full 1080p (even at 60fps) at about the same bit rate as the Canon 5DII which has been used for cinema and HD TV episodes. Like the 5DII when it first launched, it lacks a few manual controls that higher end shooters require but most people wouldn't miss. I would need it to have manual shutter angle control and broadcast compliant frame rates like 24p. Canon added manual controls, frame rates, etc. in one FW update. Since the X-E2 has a fast processor and can do 60fps it has the throughput to handle what the older 5DII could. Maybe Fuji will do a similar FW upgrade.

The bigger issue with all DSLR video options is not the sensor technology, it's the method used to downsize large MP frames to 2mp per frame at 30 60 times per second on the fly. Most cameras use a line removal algorithm to downsize the frames but this creates moire with typical moire inducing textures/objects. Now we have large format dedicated pro video cameras so DSLR options are not as attractive As they used to be. The large format video cameras are either APS or FF in size for DOF advantages, but the sensors produce images at the native frame size of the HD format. No downsizing is needed so the video quality is much cleaner.

The 5DII had noticeable moire on moire inducing subjects. But this was rare, and like with other DSLR video cameras, one learns to work around it and produce stunning footage.

Rolling shutter is another issue with all CMOS sensors. Some are better some are worse. Some editing programs can illuminate the rolling shutter affect. I haven't tested the X-E2 for that yet, I've been having too much fun shooting still images.

Sal

Sal, thanks for the detailed response! What about focusing speed? The only thing I really noticed in the sample videos on YouTube is that it seemed to take a second or two for the video to shift focus from one subject to another (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Idaa5UrHnDQ&feature=youtu.be at around the 20 second mark), which I think is unacceptable. Not sure why it should be that sluggish, though.

It's a dance between focus speed and a pleasant viewer experience for any video camera.    constant fast shifting of focus is far more distracting than slower shifts.

That said,cameras like the GH3 and EM5 are better in that regard.    DLSRs are in general worse than the XE2.

The video quality is typical with most larger frame cameras that use line skipping...a fair amount of aliasing and moire.  THe GH3 and Canon 5D III are both better, but otherwise many other cameras are the same.

If does lack full manual exposure control, but for casual use it's fine.    And if you are planning on using autofocusing, you probably aren't planning to use manual exposure.

-- hide signature --
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
unknown member
(unknown member)
Like?
Re: Why is the X-E2 video-challenged (or is it)?
In reply to Sal Baker, 9 months ago

Sal Baker wrote:

romrom wrote:

stimpy wrote:

romrom wrote:

I heard that the X-E2 is an excellent camera for stills, but that it is lackluster as far as video is concerned. Two questions:
1. Is the camera's video mediocre in absolute terms or is it just poor compared to a decent video camera? What is wrong with it, exactly? Poor low-light, camera shake, slow focus etc?
2. What I don't understand is if a camera has an excellent lens, a nice large sensor and a powerful processor, why shouldn't it have decent video? Technologically speaking, how can it be that a camera is superb at stills, but poor at video? Can someone explain how that works? Is this something that can be solved with a firmware update?

(OK, I know that is more than two questions, sorry)

I have read that x-trans just isn't ever going to be great for video for reasons I can't explain but have read several times.

Not sure I believe it when I hear Fuji don't care about video - I think if they could add stellar video they would, but I don't think it's very high on their priorities tbh.

I kinda wanted specifics, but is it even worse than video taken with, say, a Galaxy S4 or other smartphone?

The video quality is actually very good, it's full 1080p (even at 60fps) at about the same bit rate as the Canon 5DII which has been used for cinema and HD TV episodes.

Sal, I'm starting to think if someone compared a Fuji to medium format you'd find a way to say the Fuji beats it.

The Fujis are known for poor video, it's not something Fuji users want.

Please be aware of misleading people.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Sal Baker
Veteran MemberPosts: 7,704Gear list
Like?
Re: Why is the X-E2 video-challenged (or is it)?
In reply to stimpy, 9 months ago

stimpy wrote:

Sal Baker wrote:

romrom wrote:

stimpy wrote:

romrom wrote:

I heard that the X-E2 is an excellent camera for stills, but that it is lackluster as far as video is concerned. Two questions:
1. Is the camera's video mediocre in absolute terms or is it just poor compared to a decent video camera? What is wrong with it, exactly? Poor low-light, camera shake, slow focus etc?
2. What I don't understand is if a camera has an excellent lens, a nice large sensor and a powerful processor, why shouldn't it have decent video? Technologically speaking, how can it be that a camera is superb at stills, but poor at video? Can someone explain how that works? Is this something that can be solved with a firmware update?

(OK, I know that is more than two questions, sorry)

I have read that x-trans just isn't ever going to be great for video for reasons I can't explain but have read several times.

Not sure I believe it when I hear Fuji don't care about video - I think if they could add stellar video they would, but I don't think it's very high on their priorities tbh.

I kinda wanted specifics, but is it even worse than video taken with, say, a Galaxy S4 or other smartphone?

The video quality is actually very good, it's full 1080p (even at 60fps) at about the same bit rate as the Canon 5DII which has been used for cinema and HD TV episodes.

Sal, I'm starting to think if someone compared a Fuji to medium format you'd find a way to say the Fuji beats it.

I believe that 16mp Fuji's hold up very well against many FF cameras, not necessary better.  Comparing an APS-C sensor to medium format is a bit rediculous.  Have you examined the IQ in medium format backs?

The Fujis are known for poor video, it's not something Fuji users want.

Please correct any specific errors I made.  The OP evidently wants video, this is his thread, not yours.

Please be aware of misleading people.

Please correct any specific points that are misleading you.

Sal

 Sal Baker's gear list:Sal Baker's gear list
Canon EOS 5D Mark II Canon EOS 350D Fujifilm X-E2 Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 USM Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 USM +5 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
unknown member
(unknown member)
Like?
Re: Why is the X-E2 video-challenged (or is it)?
In reply to Sal Baker, 9 months ago

Sal Baker wrote:

The video quality is actually very good

Please correct any specific points that are misleading you.

Sal

The video quality is poor. The OP knows it's poor, he is asking why.

Saying it is "very good" is misleading.

/End

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Sal Baker
Veteran MemberPosts: 7,704Gear list
Like?
Re: Why is the X-E2 video-challenged (or is it)?
In reply to stimpy, 9 months ago

stimpy wrote:

Sal Baker wrote:

The video quality is actually very good

Please correct any specific points that are misleading you.

Sal

The video quality is poor. The OP knows it's poor, he is asking why

Saying it is "very good" is misleading.

I would love your evaluation of the specific points I mentioned.  Please correct any misrepresentations, specifically.  Have you ever shot video on an X-E2?

/End

 Sal Baker's gear list:Sal Baker's gear list
Canon EOS 5D Mark II Canon EOS 350D Fujifilm X-E2 Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 USM Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 USM +5 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
ap356
New MemberPosts: 18
Like?
Re: Why is the X-E2 video-challenged (or is it)?
In reply to stimpy, 9 months ago

I have an X100S, which I will assume is pretty similar to X-E2 for video.

The quality is actually very good. You can choose 1080p 60 or 30. I initially was using 60, but now I find 30 to look much better. I believe it uses a similar bitrate for both, meaning that there will be more information in each frame when set to 30.

"Bad for video" is essentially referring to the lack of manual controls. In video mode I can set the aperture, which is enough for me. On my old Canon T4i, full manual control was essential. But Fuji is very, very good at Auto and I don't find it to be a problem. Just set the aperture to get the depth of field that you want, and the camera will take care of the rest.

Autofocus in video is quite bad though. For stationary subjects, you can have the camera focus before recording which works well enough. But continuous autofocus is bad (slow and inaccurate). And of course aliasing appears now and again. I use manual focus for video with good results.

I bought the X100S expecting the video mode to be quite bad based on the reviews. But I am quite happy with it. I recently recorded my four year old nephew blowing out the candles on his birthday cake in an unlit room, and it really looks great. No aliasing, low noise, amazing colour, and very smooth motion.

Overall I am very happy with the video. Not suitable for professional use, but it can still produce great results.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
unknown member
(unknown member)
Like?
Re: Why is the X-E2 video-challenged (or is it)?
In reply to Sal Baker, 9 months ago

stimpy wrote:

Sal Baker wrote:

The video quality is actually very good

Please correct any specific points that are misleading you.

Sal

The video quality is poor. The OP knows it's poor, he is asking why

Saying it is "very good" is misleading.

I would love your evaluation of the specific points I mentioned.  Please correct any misrepresentations, specifically.  Have you ever shot video on an X-E2?

/End

Yes of course I have. It's poor, very poor. But then I brought my e2 for stills, not for video.

I would say it's adequate if placed on a tripod with a non moving subject, but as soon as you pan or the subject moves it shows why it's not well regarded.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Sal Baker
Veteran MemberPosts: 7,704Gear list
Like?
Re: Why is the X-E2 video-challenged (or is it)?
In reply to ap356, 9 months ago

ap356 wrote:

I have an X100S, which I will assume is pretty similar to X-E2 for video.

The quality is actually very good. You can choose 1080p 60 or 30. I initially was using 60, but now I find 30 to look much better. I believe it uses a similar bitrate for both, meaning that there will be more information in each frame when set to 30.

"Bad for video" is essentially referring to the lack of manual controls. In video mode I can set the aperture, which is enough for me. On my old Canon T4i, full manual control was essential. But Fuji is very, very good at Auto and I don't find it to be a problem. Just set the aperture to get the depth of field that you want, and the camera will take care of the rest.

Autofocus in video is quite bad though. For stationary subjects, you can have the camera focus before recording which works well enough. But continuous autofocus is bad (slow and inaccurate). And of course aliasing appears now and again. I use manual focus for video with good results.

I bought the X100S expecting the video mode to be quite bad based on the reviews. But I am quite happy with it. I recently recorded my four year old nephew blowing out the candles on his birthday cake in an unlit room, and it really looks great. No aliasing, low noise, amazing colour, and very smooth motion.

Overall I am very happy with the video. Not suitable for professional use, but it can still produce great results.

Good assessment.  It does have potential to be a good B camera due to its size and EVF.  Unfortunately most of the larger format video needs these days are at 24p.  Everyone wants the film look.  If Fuji ever adds this in a firmware update I would find the Fuji video more useable.

Sal

 Sal Baker's gear list:Sal Baker's gear list
Canon EOS 5D Mark II Canon EOS 350D Fujifilm X-E2 Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 USM Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 USM +5 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
JdKen
Junior MemberPosts: 33Gear list
Like?
Re: Why is the X-E2 video-challenged (or is it)?
In reply to Sal Baker, 9 months ago

As a potential new user of the X trans cameras (I'm new here but have a X100) I was looking at samples the other day. I was quite impressed with this short on Vimeo from an X-M1 http://vimeo.com/73599773 though the maker says the output is "plagued by aliasing, moire, and other artefacts as you would expect from a camera primarily designed to shoot awesome still photographs".

 JdKen's gear list:JdKen's gear list
Fujifilm FinePix X100 Fujifilm X-E1
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
unknown member
(unknown member)
Like?
Re: Why is the X-E2 video-challenged (or is it)?
In reply to JdKen, 9 months ago

JdKen wrote:

As a potential new user of the X trans cameras (I'm new here but have a X100) I was looking at samples the other day. I was quite impressed with this short on Vimeo from an X-M1 http://vimeo.com/73599773 though the maker says the output is "plagued by aliasing, moire, and other artefacts as you would expect from a camera primarily designed to shoot awesome still photographs".

That isn't a bad video really, certainly not 'very good', but works well enough.

But, this is shooting in A1 conditions, when really, most cheap digital cameras will do a fairly decent job.

For all intents and purposes, switching to video mode on the X cameras is essentially turning a wonderfully tactile manual camera into a cheap point and shoot - which to me, goes against the Fuji Ethos.

No exposure control. You cannot even adjust the ISO or the shutter speed, you have very little control in the output, much like a point & shoot.

Outside in sunny conditions this isn't an issue (aside from the moire and alisaing) but try filming at dusk, or inside at low light. That's when you see how terrible it is compared to it's contemporaries and why people call it poor. Try changing lighting conditions and see where the lack of control starts harming the output.

The max ISO on video is also 1600 - it doesn't take a genius to know what that will do to your footage.

Add to that terrible AF tracking in video mode and it is apparent why most people see video as a bit of an afterthought added on.

"Bells and whistles" is not really part of Fujis ethos with the X Series either, so I don't think it will ever compete with Panasonic or Canon who are far better regarded in that area. The X series are primarily stills cameras.

Most Fuji users accept that and have no problem with it.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Triple18
New MemberPosts: 3
Like?
Re: Why is the X-E2 video-challenged (or is it)?
In reply to romrom, 9 months ago

I've returned my XE2 as i've primarily wanted video camera and was hoping that x-e2 would be at least good enough. But after testing in a bunch of situations and different lights you start to feel that focus is just very bad, ISO is limited to 1600 so low light video is too underexposed as well. you can check different samples here http://www.youtube.com/channel/UC_OIqWTyr6bRojWnvUWtm-g

but what i will say, if the light is good and you do manual focus.... video IS ABSOLUTELY ASTONISHING.  I probably would have kept if i knew for 100% that 2 issues would be resolved in the firmware update:

1.  Flashy exposure.... 2.  Low light quality (iso bump to at least 3200).  you can see those problems on the videos....

Nothing can match the picture quality though.  I swear this camera takes awesome pictures even at iso 6400... Its unbelievable.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads