Do you really believe that - once Fuji miniaturize their IBIS like other manufacturers - they will only put in in the X-H ? I'd rather think that the X-H will disapear as soon as IBIS is small enough to get integrated in smaller bodies.
Interesting thought, it could happen.
Agreed. There may be a point in the future when it will be even cheaper to put IBIS into all cameras rather than having different assemblies for different cameras. In any case, I think soon there will be a point when IBIS will just be standard in all mainstream cameras and if you want to sell high quantities you need it as much as autofocus just to be competitive.
You have some points right. Technology usually commoditizes features that have been around for a while and then new gadgets with totally new capabilities come up. So I bet in a few years most cameras will have all the features you have described but then there will be new features that some cameras will have and some others won't.
I am completely neutral here, I am interested in your observation though, in all other areas the x-t3 is superior? Can you elaborate?
I tried to check other manufacturers who use APS-C sensors and also have IBIS. Not easy
It has a new processor, video is better. Where does the X-H1 have an edge besides IBIS and size?
Pentax and Sony have IBIS APS-C bodies. The A6500 is quite small.
You forgot Rose Gold. That's a MUST have these days!!!!
And it has worst IBIS of them all
Already in the XF10 and XT100.You forgot Rose Gold. That's a MUST have these days!!!!
Apparently (in video use at least) Fuji have the worst implemented ibis of all makes. Reviewers all seemed to say the same thing - jerky.
Imo...the XH1 was a priority for Fuji to release something for the ibis "must haves".
Possibly true for video... wouldn't know since I shoot little or none of that. However, for still photography, I'd have to see some evidence or testing that proves that point. I've consistently found the IBIS implementation on the X-H1 to be nothing short of remarkable, and if there's any jerkiness, it sure doesn't show up in the VF. Now, I'm referring to stills shooting here, not video, and I haven't read the reviews to know under which conditions this shows up.
Going back to Fuji's comments on the difficulty of putting IBIS in the XT-series, and the fact they had to redesign the shutter and increase the shutter size of the H1and increase the size of the camera over the XT-2 - it could very well be that the absolute movement is limited compared to other implementations. That would not show up on stills where the use of IBiS is different than on video. That would explain the "jerky" performance as the IBIS hits the max movement and has to recenter the sensor - hence a jerk. However, I doubt that even in video that would be an issue unless one were walking or otherwise making body movements.
And I have to strongly disagree simply based on my own experience. I shoot both with an X-T2 and X-H1. I use them both more or less interchangeably as needed, most often pairing the X-T2 with lenses that are stabilized (like the 100-400) and the X-H1 with unstabilized lenses, such as the 16-55. However, when traveling, as I am now, I usually only bring a single camera and use it with all lenses I have along. I have never seen any noticeable difference in the detail and IQ that I get with the X-H1 and the X-T2. I have used both cameras with the 100-400 to shot highly detailed subjects such as owls, and would without hesitation bring either camera for that task. At times, I have forgotten to turn OIS off on the 100-400 when shooting owls on a tripod (yeah, I know... sloppy technique), but once again, even when closely pixel peeping, I’ve see absolutely no evidence of lost detail. That goes for either camera, BTW.Saved this comment from YouTube...
I agree.
Dave.
