puttin
Veteran Member
Which one has the best IQ for photos.
-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
XH2 vs XH2S for IQ
- Thread starter puttin
- Start date
Much is going to depend on your type of photography and process/end product.
The short answer (from experience) is that the difference is negligible.
However, if your photography involves a lot of cropping or very large prints then you might see a small benefit to the 40mp sensor.
There has also been quite a lot written and said about the inferior low light performance of the 40mp sensor, however, in real world use I see no real impact. The noise is ‘different’ but nothing that I can say I’ve noticed in my images after a little post processing.
All that said, if IQ is the main/only factor and you don’t need the blazing fast performance of the H2s then I would recommend the H2. While the difference is small you might as well have more megapixels!
The short answer (from experience) is that the difference is negligible.
However, if your photography involves a lot of cropping or very large prints then you might see a small benefit to the 40mp sensor.
There has also been quite a lot written and said about the inferior low light performance of the 40mp sensor, however, in real world use I see no real impact. The noise is ‘different’ but nothing that I can say I’ve noticed in my images after a little post processing.
All that said, if IQ is the main/only factor and you don’t need the blazing fast performance of the H2s then I would recommend the H2. While the difference is small you might as well have more megapixels!
Last edited:
puttin
Veteran Member
I read that the XH2S did better with zooms on the long end.
I don’t believe that to be the case and I would struggle to think of the reasoning behind such a notion.
Tenuously, there could be an argument that the long end of the 150-600 performs better on the X-H2s purely because the maximum aperture is f8 by this point and diffraction is a little more prominent on the 40mp but I can’t say I’ve noticed this in my experience.
Last edited:
K
Kaoticphoto
Guest
owning both, at base iso, XH2 by a nice margin with the right lens
puttin
Veteran Member
They said that the images were softer, but I think that was an opinion and not a proven fact.
I've heard the AF on the X-H2s is considerably better. If you're doing any action or bird photography that is a big consideration though even for non moving objects it is supposedly better. And also for wide angle lenses stopped down. Others may have real life experiences with this-would love to hear their opinions.
K
Kaoticphoto
Guest
i don't know about animal or any fast subject, i mainly shoot commercials for billboard often in studio. i found both the AF more than adequate, i had problems with AF-S in the past, missing precision and/or consistency before the latest update. face recognition works fine for my use. what i can say that at base iso (160 iso for XH2S and 125 for XH2) X-H2 show better DR and cleaner image, with a good lens used at 5.6 or faster you can see much more details in the X-H2S images when processed correctly.
here i am speaking mainly about studio images with flash lighting
here i am speaking mainly about studio images with flash lighting
Last edited:
Bast Hotep
Veteran Member
Wildlife and bird photography is basically all I do, so I wanted to have the best Fujifilm tech available for that!
Studio_Melon
Active member
- Messages
- 64
- Reaction score
- 116
Put as simply as possible:
Do you shoot things that move?
X-H2S
Do you shoot things that are stationary?
X-H2 (X-T5)
If you shoot a mix, choose which is more important to you.
a_c_skinner
Veteran Member
I can't see why it should. I'd make a note of the source and avoid it in future.
baobob
Veteran Member
I own both. My opinion is that the IQ with the XH2 is strongly dependanr on the care while shooting. This camera does not forgive any approximation : AF, exposure, then after shooting post processing. Minimal focus approximation is much more visible. Underexposition as well. Noise management is also quite different.
As already mentionned by others, the final result difference in terms of resolution is not that big.
The rendition is probably closer to the film. Cropping ability is definitly better and that can be a real bonus for say "still willife" like birds, usually shot from quite far.
I must say all in all that I am not strongly impressed by this sensor.... I obviously get more keepers with the S.
As already mentionned by others, the final result difference in terms of resolution is not that big.
The rendition is probably closer to the film. Cropping ability is definitly better and that can be a real bonus for say "still willife" like birds, usually shot from quite far.
I must say all in all that I am not strongly impressed by this sensor.... I obviously get more keepers with the S.
DarnGoodPhotos
Veteran Member
- Messages
- 12,416
- Solutions
- 5
- Reaction score
- 7,947
Pick the XH2S for the best video and fastest/smartest AF, pick the XH2 for the ability to crop. Any slight noise differences can be recovered in post processing.
--
www.darngoodphotos.com
--
www.darngoodphotos.com
Last edited:
a_c_skinner
Veteran Member
I agree that impeccable technique is essential but all in all I am impressed with the new 40Mp sensor, though comparing with the 24Mp ones not the 26.
When Nikon produced the D800 (36Mp) they had to publish a deal of stuff pointing out what you needed to do to get the best.
When Nikon produced the D800 (36Mp) they had to publish a deal of stuff pointing out what you needed to do to get the best.
baobob
Veteran Member
I fully agree, but not always possible in reporter photography or quite often wildlife, where occasions can occur all of a sudden.
The stacked sensor of the S is terrific indeed
Spending too much time in PP to cope with this sensor might be a concern..
Why not Fuiji then ??
Best
Bob
puttin
Veteran Member
More keepers because of the IQ or AF ?
More keepers because it is more forgiving of less-than-perfect technique. The X-H2s is far more useful as a a go-to camera than the X-H2. There is no real advantage of the X-H2 unless you make prints larger than 20 x 30. I own both and use them professionally, and the X-H2s gets far more use. If you are doing primarily tripod work (landscape, architecture, etc.), and you don't skimp on lenses, then you might see a small visible advantage of the X-H2 files.
BackToNature1
Veteran Member
- Messages
- 2,867
- Reaction score
- 2,509
Meaning the difference between. Seems that's what most folks want to believe these days. Even between cropped and FF. No wonder more and more folks are just sticking with their so called smart phones.
biza43
Veteran Member
No doubt that a higher resolution sensor will resolve more detail. i see that between my X-T4 and X-T5. Does it make a difference? Only if you want to print big, or crop significantly.
There is also a reason why faster cameras are made, like the X-H2s. It all depends on what you need.
There is also a reason why faster cameras are made, like the X-H2s. It all depends on what you need.
baobob
Veteran Member
Af and noise, the second one is now no longer an issue with my brand new fast and powerful computer that runs either ACR NR+details or DXO Pure Raw in a few seconds in batch with DXO
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum