Future of X-H1 line?

[Threaded]

Fujifilm has never differentiated their models based on sensors - it has always been - reuse the same sensor across the entire model range - then refresh with the next one.

That’s not what I said at all. All I said is that the X-Pro1 was the first to use the 16mp sensor and the X-Pro2 was the first to use the 24mp sensor. Now you are telling me that Fuji is going to put the 1 year old sensor from the $899 X-T30 into it and try to sell it as something special based on a paint job and a hidden screen? It’s possible but it is also possible that we see something new.

If you are telling us that Fujifilm changed their release sensor debut schedule - sure - the 26 MP sensor didn`t debut with the X-Pro line this round - it debuted in the X-T3 first. Then jumped to the X-T30 - which means it missed the X-Pro3.

because these models are updated more frequently than the X-Pro series.

So what about the XE line or the X100 - they’ve been updated just as frequently as the XT’s in the past and used each new sensor in turn - why are they now skipping a generation all of a sudden?

The X100 series received the 16mp and 24mp sensor after the X-Pro series. The X-E series...the same. I don`t believe there were 2 totally different 16mp sensors like you seem to think. I think it was the same sensor with a different processor.

Not sure why you’ve decided that X-Trans II is some product of my imagination, but I can assure you that it was Fuji who marketed and introduced it as a “new” sensor, no matter how similar it may have been. It was a physically different package with added phase detect pixels which didn’t exist on the original first gen sensor.

The XE series has literally been X-Trans I, II and III in turn.

I personally feel they have too many models using the same sensor but whatever, here is their current line up that needs sensors if they are keeping the same lineup. 2 of the 5 have the 26 MP sensor (X-T3 and X-T30),

Name one instance where a low end model got the latest sensor before other high end models? The X-T30 would be the first if the X-Pro3 has this same sensor. Well, the X-H1 was the first I guess but they banked on ibis as the big feature.

You’ve answered your own question, the XH1 was Fuji’s most expensive new flagship model ever when launched (pricier than the X-Pro2 had ever been), and it had already waited for both the XT20 and XE3 to launch with the same sensor.

How about the XT1 - very much a high end flagship model when launched, and it used the same sensor and processor from the XE2 about a year earlier. Unlike the XH1 it was a huge success despite being almost entirely the exact same camera in a different package. How do you discount that?

3 others need sensors (X-Pro3, X-H2, X-E4)

1) X-Pro#

2) X-T#

3) X-H#

4) X-T##

5) X-E#

Concernedly possible that new sensor is in the works for the next 3 models and would help in them differentiating their models but not their historic pattern.

Not sure which historic pattern you are referring to.

The problem you have is you’re putting all of your stock in just one rather limited “historic pattern” - namely that in the X-Pro line’s *one* previous update, it got a new sensor.

It`s not a problem. It´s a fact. Each X-Pro model has been released with a major sensor upgrade. That cannot be disputed.

ONE x-pro model has been released with a major sensor upgrade. It’s only happened once!

The broader pattern you’re ignoring is that in each new sensor/processor generation, *every* model uses the same gear.

When did I ignore that? I simply am trying to say that a sensor is released in the high end cameras first and then it trickles down to the low end. The X-H1 is the only exception. Now, you are trying to say that the 26mp sensor will be used in a high end model 6-8 months after a low end model. This is not the norm in the camera world or for Fuji. Especially when the X-Pro3 will be very expensive for APSC.

As I said before (and you did ignore above) there’s already precedent with the XT1, which launched a similar period after the XE2 with exactly the same internal hardware and immediately became Fuji’s most successful premium flagship model and a breakaway hit.

Admittedly the first generation (heavily criticised at the time for its slow processor and contrast only AF) was unsurprisingly short lived, but after that we had X-Trans II in literally every model line bar the X-Pro (which was likely heavily overstocked at the time), then we had X-Trans III in literally everything, now we have X-Trans IV in.. just two models, one high and one low end? You really think so?

Huh? We had a 16mp sensor, a 24mp sensor, and a 26mp sensor... you can believe the X-Trans II crap, but effectively there wasn`t a huge difference there.

I completely agree there wasn’t a huge difference, but accepting the existence of X-Trans II isn’t a matter of belief, it really did happen, and while it made no difference to IQ (at least in raw) it did make a big difference to AF over and above the improved processor alone.

Similarly there’s barely any IQ difference between the 24 or 26mp sensors either, but in the mirrorless world sensor upgrades aren’t just about IQ - once again the real driver is autofocus (not to mention video).

I still believe that it will be a hard sell to put this current 26mp sensor in the X-Pro3. I understand you think I am wrong. However, the X-Pro series is on a 4 year update cycle and that is why I believe they need to do something different. Well, more than just a paint job and a gimmick screen.

Not sure what you’re seeing when you look at the X-Pro3, but I certainly see “something different”, for better or worse.

 

[DarnGoodPhotos]

The job of gaining market share would fall to the A7 / X-T100 models? Mass produced them and get them into the big box stores and push them out with some discounts / package deals?

The X-A7/X-T100 might increase market share, but they won't sell many expensive lenses.

 

[Maxx787]

With respect IBIS only useful on 100-400mm heavy zoom. If X-H1 was such a success it would not have been withdrawn with such huge discounts as if it became a distraction to the product line. People prefer light weight cameras which is why X-T3 retains support of customers and retailers. The next X-T4 may get improved IBIS as seen in new Olympus cameras. Also some users not in favour about top screens?

Note Olympus MX1 with 5 axis image stabilisation at 7 stops shows the advances in IBIS

 

[Jerry-astro]

With respect IBIS only useful on 100-400mm heavy zoom. If X-H1 was such a success it would not have been withdrawn with such huge discounts as if it became a distraction to the product line. People prefer light weight cameras which is why X-T3 retains support of customers and retailers. The next X-T4 may get improved IBIS as seen in new Olympus cameras. Also some users not in favour about top screens?

I think you can certainly speak for yourself and your own preferences, and perhaps less so for the market overall. Many people who use larger lenses (wildlife shooters for example) actually prefer a body that’s more proportional and balanced with those large lenses. I much preferred using the 100-400 with my X-H1 rather than my X-T2, which is why it ended up sitting on the shelf unused for a good while before I recently sold it. Even taking IBIS out of the picture, I find the X-H1 to be WAY more comfortable to handle with that lens than the X-T2. I feel similarly with respect to the 16-55 — not just with respect to balance, but the addition of in-body stabilization that makes that lens WAY more useful in low light situations. Many comments I’ve read from others here would support that view, even if you personally don’t happen to agree.

And the X-H1 has hardly been “withdrawn.” With the new pricing incentives, I get the impression from scanning a lot of messages in the forum that there are more than a few people buying them. Did it meet Fuji’s expectations... doubtful. Does the size appeal to everyone... no. However, for certain uses — particularly those that benefit from IBIS — it’s one of the best bodies that Fuji offers, and I, at least, wouldn’t trade it for any other. Obviously YMMV.

--
Jerry-Astro
Fujifilm X Forum Co-Mod

 

[John Gellings]

Fujifilm has never differentiated their models based on sensors - it has always been - reuse the same sensor across the entire model range - then refresh with the next one.

That’s not what I said at all. All I said is that the X-Pro1 was the first to use the 16mp sensor and the X-Pro2 was the first to use the 24mp sensor. Now you are telling me that Fuji is going to put the 1 year old sensor from the $899 X-T30 into it and try to sell it as something special based on a paint job and a hidden screen? It’s possible but it is also possible that we see something new.

If you are telling us that Fujifilm changed their release sensor debut schedule - sure - the 26 MP sensor didn`t debut with the X-Pro line this round - it debuted in the X-T3 first. Then jumped to the X-T30 - which means it missed the X-Pro3.

because these models are updated more frequently than the X-Pro series.

So what about the XE line or the X100 - they’ve been updated just as frequently as the XT’s in the past and used each new sensor in turn - why are they now skipping a generation all of a sudden?

The X100 series received the 16mp and 24mp sensor after the X-Pro series. The X-E series...the same. I don`t believe there were 2 totally different 16mp sensors like you seem to think. I think it was the same sensor with a different processor.

Not sure why you’ve decided that X-Trans II is some product of my imagination, but I can assure you that it was Fuji who marketed and introduced it as a “new” sensor, no matter how similar it may have been.

Imagination? Stop with the hyperbole. I should have said IQ wise, they were very similar. It is true what you say about the rest.

It was a physically different package with added phase detect pixels which didn’t exist on the original first gen sensor.

The XE series has literally been X-Trans I, II and III in turn.

True... but each X-E was released after the sensor was used in a higher end model.

I personally feel they have too many models using the same sensor but whatever, here is their current line up that needs sensors if they are keeping the same lineup. 2 of the 5 have the 26 MP sensor (X-T3 and X-T30),

Name one instance where a low end model got the latest sensor before other high end models? The X-T30 would be the first if the X-Pro3 has this same sensor. Well, the X-H1 was the first I guess but they banked on ibis as the big feature.

You’ve answered your own question, the XH1 was Fuji’s most expensive new flagship model ever when launched (pricier than the X-Pro2 had ever been), and it had already waited for both the XT20 and XE3 to launch with the same sensor.

How about the XT1 - very much a high end flagship model when launched, and it used the same sensor and processor from the XE2 about a year earlier. Unlike the XH1 it was a huge success despite being almost entirely the exact same camera in a different package. How do you discount that?

3 others need sensors (X-Pro3, X-H2, X-E4)

1) X-Pro#

2) X-T#

3) X-H#

4) X-T##

5) X-E#

Concernedly possible that new sensor is in the works for the next 3 models and would help in them differentiating their models but not their historic pattern.

Not sure which historic pattern you are referring to.

The problem you have is you’re putting all of your stock in just one rather limited “historic pattern” - namely that in the X-Pro line’s *one* previous update, it got a new sensor.

It`s not a problem. It´s a fact. Each X-Pro model has been released with a major sensor upgrade. That cannot be disputed.

ONE x-pro model has been released with a major sensor upgrade. It’s only happened once!

X100 had a 12mp Bayer sensor and then the X-Pro1 had the first X-Trans. I thought it was major at the time.

The broader pattern you’re ignoring is that in each new sensor/processor generation, *every* model uses the same gear.

When did I ignore that? I simply am trying to say that a sensor is released in the high end cameras first and then it trickles down to the low end. The X-H1 is the only exception. Now, you are trying to say that the 26mp sensor will be used in a high end model 6-8 months after a low end model. This is not the norm in the camera world or for Fuji. Especially when the X-Pro3 will be very expensive for APSC.

As I said before (and you did ignore above) there’s already precedent with the XT1, which launched a similar period after the XE2 with exactly the same internal hardware and immediately became Fuji’s most successful premium flagship model and a breakaway hit.

Hmmm, good point. I didn't ignore you on purpose. So we have them using the same sensor on two new products after being used in lower end models. The X-T1 and the X-H1. My take is that they thought the newness of those models was enough to sell the camera. Could be that they think the 26mp sensor is good enough for the X-Pro3 too... or that they simply do not have any other option.

The fact that Sony put the 24mp sensor in the a6600 instead of the 26mp sensor seems odd too. Perhaps Sony doesn't have anything else to offer Fuji.

Admittedly the first generation (heavily criticised at the time for its slow processor and contrast only AF) was unsurprisingly short lived, but after that we had X-Trans II in literally every model line bar the X-Pro (which was likely heavily overstocked at the time), then we had X-Trans III in literally everything, now we have X-Trans IV in.. just two models, one high and one low end? You really think so?

Huh? We had a 16mp sensor, a 24mp sensor, and a 26mp sensor... you can believe the X-Trans II crap, but effectively there wasn`t a huge difference there.

I completely agree there wasn’t a huge difference, but accepting the existence of X-Trans II isn’t a matter of belief, it really did happen, and while it made no difference to IQ (at least in raw) it did make a big difference to AF over and above the improved processor alone.

True.

Similarly there’s barely any IQ difference between the 24 or 26mp sensors either, but in the mirrorless world sensor upgrades aren’t just about IQ - once again the real driver is autofocus (not to mention video).

I guess... I actually prefer the 24mp sensor to be honest. At this point, any AF gains aren't that big of a deal for me...they are all pretty good. The X-Pro series is my favorite camera. I guess I'm just hoping for a little future proofing sensor wise since it'll be a long wait for the next one. For me, high ISO is a big driver. We haven't gained anything in years here.

I still believe that it will be a hard sell to put this current 26mp sensor in the X-Pro3. I understand you think I am wrong. However, the X-Pro series is on a 4 year update cycle and that is why I believe they need to do something different. Well, more than just a paint job and a gimmick screen.

Not sure what you’re seeing when you look at the X-Pro3, but I certainly see “something different”, for better or worse.

Yes, superfically so far... a nice paint job and new screen. No problem for me there. Of course the OVF/EVF upgrade will be huge, but there haven't been any true numbers revealed. If they can also manage to put a new sensor in it... wouldn't it be nice? There are only two options here... there are being quite about the sensor because it is new or they are being quite because it is the same old same old.

 

[Maxx787]

High resolution pixel mode as seen in Olympus M1X may be of more value than IBIS in my opinion to users. How come photographers managed with cameras without IBIS for generations? What put me off buying Sony A7 II was the humming noise of the IBIS unit engaging when turning on that camera; extra battery drain? My comments based on the opinion of major camera retailer who never stocked XH-1 unless ordered. The current discounting proving him right? Personally I prefer my XT-2 with grip than my XT-3.

 

[Jerry-astro]

High resolution pixel mode as seen in Olympus M1X may be of more value than IBIS in my opinion to users. How come photographers managed with cameras without IBIS for generations? What put me off buying Sony A7 II was the humming noise of the IBIS unit engaging when turning on that camera; extra battery drain? My comments based on the opinion of major camera retailer who never stocked XH-1 unless ordered. The current discounting proving him right? Personally I prefer my XT-2 with grip than my XT-3.

How come people were able to manage with horses and buggies before the advent of the automobile. Sorry, but that in particular is not a viable argument at all. People can manage without a lot of things. That doesn't mean that they aren't desirable or have significant value. My has H1 has no discernible hum or other noise (at least to my ears) nor anything that I find at all distracting. The technology just works. As far as the current discounting goes, that likely has less to do with IBIS and more to do with Fuji's previous pricing for the X-H1, which was above what most people were willing to pay... hence the need for an adjustment to move some volume.

So, if you haven't actually used IBIS, then I'll take your comments with a grain of salt, I'm afraid. I find the technology to be compelling and highly useful. I've been an advocate of stabilization for a lot time, since I generally prefer handholding a camera to using a tripod. IBIS enables that, most importantly with very high quality lenses that don't offer stabilization. It's often the difference between handholding or being forced to use a tripod. Perhaps less of a problem outdoors, but try using one when shooting cathedral interiors (hint: they're not generally allowed in those locations). Other options are more iffy and less reliable under those sorts of low light conditions.

If you're not a fan or advocate of stabilization, I get it, and we'll have to agree to disagree on that and move on. I've used it for years and am also a strong advocate of using high quality lenses, such as the 16-55, where some form of stabilization can really enable shots that are otherwise impossible.

 

[Maxx787]

Accept your comments on the benefits of IBIS based on your actual experience. I always prefer travelling by horse rather than by any car. Technology improves our lives but more often than not there is a price to pay? Too much of a good thing....we become redundant?

 

[Jerry-astro]

Accept your comments on the benefits of IBIS based on your actual experience. I always prefer travelling by horse rather than by any car. Technology improves our lives but more often than not there is a price to pay? Too much of a good thing....we become redundant?

I think all of us who’ve accumulated a few years (to put it gently) aren’t necessarily always willing to readily just accept technology of various sorts without a very clear value proposition. Having worked in the high tech sector for years prior to retiring a few years ago, I tend to perhaps be willing to be an early adopter more so than many of my contemporaries. That said, those who are willing to live on the “bleeding edge” are a lot more likely to get bitten (and I have the scars to show for it). My aversion to tripods (more so in the past) is what made OIS and IBIS more attractive to me. Someone with a different background — particularly pre-digital days — might be less inclined to readily jump in and adopt that technology, and for those folks, I doubt that their photography suffers much for it.

I don’t see a right or wrong here. Just two different perspectives on the advantages that one particular technology might bring. I appreciated the dialog.

 

[Steve Bingham]

I agree, Jerry. I KNOW tripods are necessary but I really dislike them. Mine just sits there most of the time. Hey, IBIS works well. I grew up with tripods, realizing the superior results they could bring. Now, time is short so I love my IBIS. Besides that, it is a lot easier to carry the 90mm than the 80mm! A lot easier!

Accept your comments on the benefits of IBIS based on your actual experience. I always prefer travelling by horse rather than by any car. Technology improves our lives but more often than not there is a price to pay? Too much of a good thing....we become redundant?

I think all of us who’ve accumulated a few years (to put it gently) aren’t necessarily always willing to readily just accept technology of various sorts without a very clear value proposition. Having worked in the high tech sector for years prior to retiring a few years ago, I tend to perhaps be willing to be an early adopter more so than many of my contemporaries. That said, those who are willing to live on the “bleeding edge” are a lot more likely to get bitten (and I have the scars to show for it). My aversion to tripods (more so in the past) is what made OIS and IBIS more attractive to me. Someone with a different background — particularly pre-digital days — might be less inclined to readily jump in and adopt that technology, and for those folks, I doubt that their photography suffers much for it.

I don’t see a right or wrong here. Just two different perspectives on the advantages that one particular technology might bring. I appreciated the dialog.

 

[Steve Bingham]

much more meaningful than the 24 to 26 now isn't it?

The MP race is far from over and newer semiconductor design and process technologies are resulting in better performance of smaller pixels. I think Canon has shown then - at least they have according to the DPR report.

So Fuji to claim king of the roost in APSC better be catching up and soon.

Allright, let's cut the half-page long quote madness...

Thank you.

The MP war is good for boosting your rolling shutter and magnifying your lens faults. A 2014 model A7S is just 12MP on a full frame(!) but produces so crisp and clear IQ that no APSC does today, especially not beyond ISO3200. Lots of pixels are also common source of lossy video recording practices, i.e. line skipping: perfect example here is the Moiré and noise laden FF video from the a7rII. Right, they tried to mitigate the issue with an oversampling mode: ended up trading Moiré and noise to much more rolling shutter.