FujiFilm X-H2S Sensor Measurements at PhotonsToPhotos

Here's the Photographic Dynamic Range (PDR)

I think this is substantially unchanged. Don't be fooled by a slight left/right shift due to "measured ISO".

High Conversion Gain (HGC) Fixed Pattern Noise (FPN) results are pending.

bclaff wrote:

Here's the Photographic Dynamic Range (PDR)

I think this is substantially unchanged. Don't be fooled by a slight left/right shift due to "measured ISO".

High Conversion Gain (HGC) Fixed Pattern Noise (FPN) results are pending.

Thanks for sharing . Your finding corroborate my first impression while comparing the XT4 and the XH2S

I am a bit surprised by the astonishing good results of the Xpro3 sensor, considering that Fuji is supposed to use the same sensor for the XT3 XT4 and X pro 3

Here's the read noise chart,

Looks to be noisier than the X-T4, which is noisier than the X-T2. Another step forward in speed, but backwards in noise.

bclaff wrote:

Erik Baumgartner wrote:

Here's the read noise chart,

Looks to be noisier than the X-T4, which is noisier than the X-T2. Another step forward in speed, but backwards in noise.

Remember, that's a pixel-level measurement and the X-H2S pixels are smaller.

Yeah, but only slightly smaller. If the X-T3/4 look noisier than the X-T2 in the real world (they do), the X-H2s will likely look noisier too. It would be nice if there was an in-camera option to switch to a slower, cleaner readout speed, you don't need all that speed to shoot a landscape.

X-T4 vs. X-T2, identical NR/sharpening etc.

Erik Baumgartner wrote:

Here's the read noise chart,

Looks to be noisier than the X-T4, which is noisier than the X-T2. Another step forward in speed, but backwards in noise.

I have seen some side by side comparisons to X-T4, the noise is a tiny bit cleaner than X-T4.

SrMi wrote:

Powerdoc wrote:

bclaff wrote:

Here's the Photographic Dynamic Range (PDR)

I think this is substantially unchanged. Don't be fooled by a slight left/right shift due to "measured ISO".

High Conversion Gain (HGC) Fixed Pattern Noise (FPN) results are pending.

Thanks for sharing . Your finding corroborate my first impression while comparing the XT4 and the XH2S

I am a bit surprised by the astonishing good results of the Xpro3 sensor, considering that Fuji is supposed to use the same sensor for the XT3 XT4 and X pro 3

It’s an illusion:

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/4462302

Thanks for the answer

What would be really nice is if Fuji gave us a sensor with a true ISO 100, or even better, ISO 64 like Nikon has. Would make a big difference for landscape photographers in terms of noise. Would be really nice if they implemented this on their 40mp X-H2, then it would be closer to full frame and be as big a boost to their new higher sharpness lenses as the pixel boost is. Would really improve image quality in a meaningful way for all their lenses, not just the new breed of f1.4 primes. Why they haven't done this by now is beyond me.

Erik Baumgartner wrote:

Here's the read noise chart,

Looks to be noisier than the X-T4, which is noisier than the X-T2. Another step forward in speed, but backwards in noise.

Regarding the Dual Gain, looking at the chart, isn't it supposed to take place at 800 ISO?  I see it is somewhere just over 400 ISO?

robert1955 wrote:

Gary Barnett wrote:

Erik Baumgartner wrote:

Here's the read noise chart,

Regarding the Dual Gain, looking at the chart, isn't it supposed to take place at 800 ISO? I see it is somewhere just over 400 ISO?

Seems similar to the XT4, though IIRC there are also models where it is at 640. These are implementation choices

Thanks, ISO 640 it is then.

I read Thom's review of X-S10 (which has the same sensor as X-T4 & X-T30) that its dual gain triggers at ISO 800.

He recommends shooting at either 160 or 800 but 800 is still very good anyway.