The Fujifilm X-H2 High ISO Noise vs the X-T2

yomimoi wrote:

Jerry-astro wrote:

If you are seriously expecting a crop format sensor to provide equivalent IQ or noise as compared to a FF sensor, then you’re probably kidding yourself.

I'm not, seriously or jokingly, but I keep reading that here from some people: "negligible difference", "you have to look very closely"... well, no.

While well applied NR can be a huge help in cleaning up a noisy image, while retaining decent detail, I would expect the results from a larger sensor to offer a better results… it’s simply a matter of physics. That said, I’ve used Topaz deNoise on some pretty noisy images and have found detail retention and NR to be excellent and more than usable, even for reasonably sized enlargements. However, your own criteria for “good enough” may be vastly different from mine or others.

I think the X-T2 at ISO 6400 was good enough in many (not all) circumstances. X-H2/X-T5 both look worse to me in every single high ISO sample I've been able to find. And there's not even that much more detail to make up for the increased noise. The only advantage is cropping ability. Not a minor one, but I think most users would have been happier with a better high ISO performance.

Of course in many cases an X-T2 sample is not available for comparison, as in DPR's studio scene, but after 6 years shooting with the X-T2 I think I have a pretty good grasp of its capabilities.

Then again, as you say, others may have vastly different criteria.

As I mentioned, I’ve had plenty of success with NR on my X-H2s using Topaz deNoise.  Detail retention is excellent and the workflow is simple and very straightforward.  I can jump directly from LR into deNoise, then back to LR for any further editing.  If the end result or workflow doesn’t meet your own criteria, then you may have little choice but to move to FF or find another lower noise solution.