X-H2S vs X-H2 and X-T5 Autofocus

[10sj03]

Does the X-H2S have better autofocus performance than the X-H2 and X-T5? The recent autofocus “problem” people point out seems to be for the 40MP sensor only but not the 26MP stacked sensor. Don’t all three cameras are supposed to have the same autofocus algorithm?

Asking because I am upgrading my X-T2. The main reason to upgrade is better autofocus tracking for kids sports. I haven’t considered the X-H2S before because of price and I don’t do video. However, should I just get the X-H2s if that’s the one with reliable autofocus.



Joe

 

[MrKazador31]

Does the X-H2S have better autofocus performance than the X-H2 and X-T5? The recent autofocus “problem” people point out seems to be for the 40MP sensor only but not the 26MP stacked sensor. Don’t all three cameras are supposed to have the same autofocus algorithm?
Asking because I am upgrading my X-T2. The main reason to upgrade is better autofocus tracking for kids sports. I haven’t considered the X-H2S before because of price and I don’t do video. However, should I just get the X-H2s if that’s the one with reliable autofocus.

Joe

What's up with all the recent auto focus topics lol. Anyways, I've noticed auto focus issues with my H2S. It's not perfect.

 

[baobob]

I own oth Xh2 and XH2s. I have abundantly posted about the Xh2 AF and personally given my work and now experience I find the AF good. The XH2s AF is justexcellent (even if some other brands light have a slight edge on that)

Comparing my 2 bodies I would say that the XH2 will get 50-60% tack sharp compared to XH2s in the fast action,sport, wildlife.For me as a second body I fond that very good given the size of the file Wether this meets your needs is a pure individual question and position. If you don't do too much fast action, go for the Xh2. On the contrary go to .... Xh2s.

With XH2s thx to the stacked sensor you can use use the ES nearly all the time = no black out, silence, possible very slow SS. You use flash with Es including HSS at very fast speed which for events might be very interesting (dancers) The rolling shutter effect is rarely present (propellers of aircrafts however)

 

[baobob]

no AF system is perfect. Morris gave all details regarding all majors brands recently.

 

[10sj03]

no AF system is perfect. Morris gave all details regarding all majors brands recently.

 

[GMacF]

I’ve found the X-T5 AF very good and it’s definitely a step up from the X-T4.
The X-H2S is a different level altogether. Yes it has its flaws although it’s highly probable these are being caused by the soft squidgy thing using camera i.e. yours truly.

With the cold weather spell here in the UK, my bird table has become quite a hive of activity but since it’s all small birds I do struggle to get consistently good AF - but birding is not my wheelhouse so I wouldn’t say I’m a good judge of the AF in that regard.
For my sports work I’ve found the X-H2S to be almost perfect.
I also use the X-T5 as a second body for sports and I’ve been very impressed with it - I’d have few qualms if it was my only sports body.

 

[10sj03]

I’ve found the X-T5 AF very good and it’s definitely a step up from the X-T4.
The X-H2S is a different level altogether. Yes it has its flaws although it’s highly probable these are being caused by the soft squidgy thing using camera i.e. yours truly.

With the cold weather spell here in the UK, my bird table has become quite a hive of activity but since it’s all small birds I do struggle to get consistently good AF - but birding is not my wheelhouse so I wouldn’t say I’m a good judge of the AF in that regard.
For my sports work I’ve found the X-H2S to be almost perfect.
I also use the X-T5 as a second body for sports and I’ve been very impressed with it - I’d have few qualms if it was my only sports body.

Thank you. Any of the camera mentioned is a huge step up on AF compared to my X-T2 Right now, I am mostly using my Fujifilm for kids sports like baseball, tennis and swim. As they grow older, kids will be faster but less erratic in their movement. The only thing that concerns me on those negative review is the camera shows green box focus but the actual photo is blurry. That has happened often for my X-T2.

 

[GMacF]

I’ve found the X-T5 AF very good and it’s definitely a step up from the X-T4.
The X-H2S is a different level altogether. Yes it has its flaws although it’s highly probable these are being caused by the soft squidgy thing using camera i.e. yours truly.

With the cold weather spell here in the UK, my bird table has become quite a hive of activity but since it’s all small birds I do struggle to get consistently good AF - but birding is not my wheelhouse so I wouldn’t say I’m a good judge of the AF in that regard.
For my sports work I’ve found the X-H2S to be almost perfect.
I also use the X-T5 as a second body for sports and I’ve been very impressed with it - I’d have few qualms if it was my only sports body.

Thank you. Any of the camera mentioned is a huge step up on AF compared to my X-T2 Right now, I am mostly using my Fujifilm for kids sports like baseball, tennis and swim. As they grow older, kids will be faster but less erratic in their movement. The only thing that concerns me on those negative review is the camera shows green box focus but the actual photo is blurry. That has happened often for my X-T2.

The issue I have, personally, with this scenario is that people set the camera up, stick on tracking and expect it to magically acquire focus on everything they want. According to reviews, Sony (and possibly others) do this better than Fujifilm and that's fair enough, I'm not here to claim Fuji is the best.

BUT, for moving targets (sports in particular) there is no substitute for Zone (or centre point if that's you preference) and good camera technique. I would never shoot a football match and just expect the camera to track every subject I want it to - it just doesn't happen - plus it's one aspect of control I'd rather keep.

 

[10sj03]

I’ve found the X-T5 AF very good and it’s definitely a step up from the X-T4.
The X-H2S is a different level altogether. Yes it has its flaws although it’s highly probable these are being caused by the soft squidgy thing using camera i.e. yours truly.

With the cold weather spell here in the UK, my bird table has become quite a hive of activity but since it’s all small birds I do struggle to get consistently good AF - but birding is not my wheelhouse so I wouldn’t say I’m a good judge of the AF in that regard.
For my sports work I’ve found the X-H2S to be almost perfect.
I also use the X-T5 as a second body for sports and I’ve been very impressed with it - I’d have few qualms if it was my only sports body.

Thank you. Any of the camera mentioned is a huge step up on AF compared to my X-T2 Right now, I am mostly using my Fujifilm for kids sports like baseball, tennis and swim. As they grow older, kids will be faster but less erratic in their movement. The only thing that concerns me on those negative review is the camera shows green box focus but the actual photo is blurry. That has happened often for my X-T2.

The issue I have, personally, with this scenario is that people set the camera up, stick on tracking and expect it to magically acquire focus on everything they want. According to reviews, Sony (and possibly others) do this better than Fujifilm and that's fair enough, I'm not here to claim Fuji is the best.

BUT, for moving targets (sports in particular) there is no substitute for Zone (or centre point if that's you preference) and good camera technique. I would never shoot a football match and just expect the camera to track every subject I want it to - it just doesn't happen - plus it's one aspect of control I'd rather keep.

I don't expect the camera to do everything. One specific case I want the camera to do is to track a baseball player running home from third base. With the X-T2 and 3x3 zone or single point AF-C, too often it will lose the player and focus on the batter, the catcher or the coach standing near the third base. With the X-T2 I would just pre-focus on the home plate and get the player stepping or sliding to the base. I am also shooting behind the fence and use F2.8 to throw the fence out of focus. Hence, not much margin for focus errors.

 

[baobob]

You might choose the S model given your type of photography

 

[deednets]

no AF system is perfect. Morris gave all details regarding all majors brands recently.

I know that Morris is regarded here by some to be THE best autofocusser. He regularly mentions that manual focus had also been around before we even dreamed of AF. I started photography in 1971 and managed to get a lot of pics in focus.

But that was then. This is 2022. Regarding that nonsense that no system is perfect, it is such a silly comment as then there would be no further development possible. But there's always room for improvement. So therefore the "nothing is perfect" mantra might well be correct.

What the writer means is something different though: Fuji isn't perfect, but neither is Sony (etc...). And then closely followed by some first hand experience with the Z9 and the A1.

I will possibly upgrade my current X-Pro3 to maybe the Pro4? Not sure yet, still watching the developments. But have used the - by comparison to the Z9 and the A1 - rather pedestrian A7IV. With that camera I get around (really rough guess) 100% of my shots in focus. Where I want it. No F8 (F12 in full frame language) needed by F1.8 or F2 (1.2 for the 1.8 in APS-C speak).

Morris takes excellent shots with his X-T3. I am sure I could also get there if I put the effort in, maybe not who knows, but I am typically ok when I can frame a subject through the viewfinder. But really suck when I try to frame a fast moving subject via an LCD. I had near nil frames in focus when I used zone focusing with dogs at play. Not quite correct: I had parts of the images in focus but not where it mattered. Tried the measly A7C and could simply hold the camera near the ground, take a couple of shots and they were in focus.

Always. So from somebody who actually uses a Sony, the comparisons where somebody had same-same, but different results with an A1 I find really hard to believe.

Here is a shot where 2 dogs ran past me at 40km/h, note that the Husky-Shepherd legs are in mid-air. The camera kept the green square over the dog on the left, I took ONE shot here holding the camera down. No idea how I would miss this using the clumsy A1 or a Z9 ...



As I am sure you will know, I use Fuji as my main system, the most lenses I have, are Fuji lenses. So would LOVE to see improvements and then put this "issue" to rest.

But for now, at least my current entry level (found this somewhere as a term I find difficult to go along with) Sony A7IV is leagues ahead of my X-Pro3, which had better AF than my X-T2 etc etc etc

For this shot I also only took one. And again shot from the hip ;-)


Fast play at F2 (F 1.3 APS-C 1.53 conversion)

I am sure that those true Fuji wizards could get those shots also from the hip, simply place the square over the dog's eye right??

But I am afraid I can't.

So "nothing is perfect" it may be, but I would LOVE to have this "not-so-perfect" AF in my X-Pro3. You shoot the moon a lot and sometimes buildings or ship wrecks, I don't think your needs - or simple wants - are the same as mine.

Deed (the triple system traitor... ;-) )

 

[dark13star]

I haven't tried the X-H2 or the X-T5, but as an X-T3 owner, I waited to see what they would do with the T5 and then bought the X-H2s after I saw the specs. I also can't compare it to the fastest performing cameras available today, but it is the fastest focusing camera I have ever used. My initial birding tests tell me it is better than my last Nikon DSLR, the D700, which I sold after Fuji got useable for birding (the X-T2 for me).

The X-H2s is quite a change coming from the X-T line I've used for the last 10+ years, but now that I am figuring out the 7 custom banks, I'm really liking how much I can store in them. While I always liked the dials of the X-T, the Q menu was a bit of a waste for me as a raw shooter. I'm liking the custom settings, but it does take a while to get them right because they really do store almost everything.

 

[Waku Waku]

Does the X-H2S have better autofocus performance than the X-H2 and X-T5? The recent autofocus “problem” people point out seems to be for the 40MP sensor only but not the 26MP stacked sensor. Don’t all three cameras are supposed to have the same autofocus algorithm?

Total AF performance is broken down to

• Lens motor
• Sensor readout
• Processor
• Algorithm
• Camera settings

All variables above are the same between the X-H2s/H2/T5 except "sensor readout". The X-H2s uses a stacked sensor and has vastly superior readout speed. So yes, X-H2s is better than X-H2/T5 for AF performance.

There is much controversy regarding AF performance. Only thing without doubt is it is definitely better than prior generations.

How much is attributed to user error? How much is it actual hardware/algo? We don't know conclusively yet. No one has done a detailed and extensive test. We only have case examples of it both failing and working fine.

• Some might be using older lenses with slower motor not aware it affecting AF.
• 40MP might be too much data for the processor to handle at high burst.
• Higher mpx can reveal slight miss focus that might not be as apparent with 26MP.
• Most complains are with AF-C hit rate, but some have AF-S issues as well.
• Most of the complaints stem from X-H2/T5. It has slower readout compounded on top of higher 40MP processing needs.
• "release" priority is the default setting, it takes pictures even if focus hasn't been locked. Changing to "focus" priority will ensure focus, but at the expense of missing out on possible usable imperfect shots.
• Users might have gotten away with "release" as default in past models, but higher 40MP readout/processing revealed difference more so.
• If AF+MF is enabled, it can ignore "focus" priority settings and act as "release"
• Maybe AF algorithm was tailored for X-H2s stack sensor speed and hasn't been optimized for the slower readout of the X-H2/T5.

Asking because I am upgrading my X-T2. The main reason to upgrade is better autofocus tracking for kids sports. I haven’t considered the X-H2S before because of price and I don’t do video. However, should I just get the X-H2s if that’s the one with reliable autofocus.

The general advice is if eye AF reliability & ease of use is important then you can't go wrong with Sony/Canon. They have rock solid proven track record and more features. Though some claim Fuji has caught up. Also others claiming it is far from it.

If you don't want to question, have doubts, need confidence and/or not fuss with fine tuning optimal settings, just work without much effort then go Sony/Canon.

All I can say without doubt is whatever camera you pick (X-H2s/H2/T5) they will all be substantially better than your X-T2. How much better? That is up for grabs. Is it enough for you? That depends. You'll have to test yourself to see if it is acceptable for your environment.

 

[nightowlnz]

Don’t all three cameras are supposed to have the same autofocus algorithm?

Theoretically yes, and by all accounts AF has improved across the models - the difference is the XH2S has a stacked sensor which has a much faster readout rate, so it can process/assess focus more rapidly.

It seems to me that they've improved over previous generations, but perhaps the out-of-the-box settings may not be optimal and need further tweaking to get the best performance. But, if AF is absolutely critical - seems like Sony/Canon's latest are still hard to beat.

 

[JushshootMe]

no AF system is perfect. Morris gave all details regarding all majors brands recently.

I know that Morris is regarded here by some to be THE best autofocusser. He regularly mentions that manual focus had also been around before we even dreamed of AF. I started photography in 1971 and managed to get a lot of pics in focus.

But that was then. This is 2022. Regarding that nonsense that no system is perfect, it is such a silly comment as then there would be no further development possible. But there's always room for improvement. So therefore the "nothing is perfect" mantra might well be correct.

What the writer means is something different though: Fuji isn't perfect, but neither is Sony (etc...). And then closely followed by some first hand experience with the Z9 and the A1.

I will possibly upgrade my current X-Pro3 to maybe the Pro4? Not sure yet, still watching the developments. But have used the - by comparison to the Z9 and the A1 - rather pedestrian A7IV. With that camera I get around (really rough guess) 100% of my shots in focus. Where I want it. No F8 (F12 in full frame language) needed by F1.8 or F2 (1.2 for the 1.8 in APS-C speak).

Morris takes excellent shots with his X-T3. I am sure I could also get there if I put the effort in, maybe not who knows, but I am typically ok when I can frame a subject through the viewfinder. But really suck when I try to frame a fast moving subject via an LCD. I had near nil frames in focus when I used zone focusing with dogs at play. Not quite correct: I had parts of the images in focus but not where it mattered. Tried the measly A7C and could simply hold the camera near the ground, take a couple of shots and they were in focus.

Always. So from somebody who actually uses a Sony, the comparisons where somebody had same-same, but different results with an A1 I find really hard to believe.

Here is a shot where 2 dogs ran past me at 40km/h, note that the Husky-Shepherd legs are in mid-air. The camera kept the green square over the dog on the left, I took ONE shot here holding the camera down. No idea how I would miss this using the clumsy A1 or a Z9 ...



As I am sure you will know, I use Fuji as my main system, the most lenses I have, are Fuji lenses. So would LOVE to see improvements and then put this "issue" to rest.

But for now, at least my current entry level (found this somewhere as a term I find difficult to go along with) Sony A7IV is leagues ahead of my X-Pro3, which had better AF than my X-T2 etc etc etc

For this shot I also only took one. And again shot from the hip ;-)


Fast play at F2 (F 1.3 APS-C 1.53 conversion)

I am sure that those true Fuji wizards could get those shots also from the hip, simply place the square over the dog's eye right??

But I am afraid I can't.

So "nothing is perfect" it may be, but I would LOVE to have this "not-so-perfect" AF in my X-Pro3. You shoot the moon a lot and sometimes buildings or ship wrecks, I don't think your needs - or simple wants - are the same as mine.

Deed (the triple system traitor... ;-) )

I think the Fuji would have grabbed these shots too , but if the camera was setup for it. That's the difference , I'm coming from an A7rIVa , and yes it's more consistent than the X-T5 / XH2 but the difference isn't as drastic as some say. I do agree that the Sony's are easier to use for subject tracking , I guess if I wanted easy I would use my cellphone.

 

[deednets]

no AF system is perfect. Morris gave all details regarding all majors brands recently.

I know that Morris is regarded here by some to be THE best autofocusser. He regularly mentions that manual focus had also been around before we even dreamed of AF. I started photography in 1971 and managed to get a lot of pics in focus.

But that was then. This is 2022. Regarding that nonsense that no system is perfect, it is such a silly comment as then there would be no further development possible. But there's always room for improvement. So therefore the "nothing is perfect" mantra might well be correct.

What the writer means is something different though: Fuji isn't perfect, but neither is Sony (etc...). And then closely followed by some first hand experience with the Z9 and the A1.

I will possibly upgrade my current X-Pro3 to maybe the Pro4? Not sure yet, still watching the developments. But have used the - by comparison to the Z9 and the A1 - rather pedestrian A7IV. With that camera I get around (really rough guess) 100% of my shots in focus. Where I want it. No F8 (F12 in full frame language) needed by F1.8 or F2 (1.2 for the 1.8 in APS-C speak).

Morris takes excellent shots with his X-T3. I am sure I could also get there if I put the effort in, maybe not who knows, but I am typically ok when I can frame a subject through the viewfinder. But really suck when I try to frame a fast moving subject via an LCD. I had near nil frames in focus when I used zone focusing with dogs at play. Not quite correct: I had parts of the images in focus but not where it mattered. Tried the measly A7C and could simply hold the camera near the ground, take a couple of shots and they were in focus.

Always. So from somebody who actually uses a Sony, the comparisons where somebody had same-same, but different results with an A1 I find really hard to believe.

Here is a shot where 2 dogs ran past me at 40km/h, note that the Husky-Shepherd legs are in mid-air. The camera kept the green square over the dog on the left, I took ONE shot here holding the camera down. No idea how I would miss this using the clumsy A1 or a Z9 ...



As I am sure you will know, I use Fuji as my main system, the most lenses I have, are Fuji lenses. So would LOVE to see improvements and then put this "issue" to rest.

But for now, at least my current entry level (found this somewhere as a term I find difficult to go along with) Sony A7IV is leagues ahead of my X-Pro3, which had better AF than my X-T2 etc etc etc

For this shot I also only took one. And again shot from the hip ;-)


Fast play at F2 (F 1.3 APS-C 1.53 conversion)

I am sure that those true Fuji wizards could get those shots also from the hip, simply place the square over the dog's eye right??

But I am afraid I can't.

So "nothing is perfect" it may be, but I would LOVE to have this "not-so-perfect" AF in my X-Pro3. You shoot the moon a lot and sometimes buildings or ship wrecks, I don't think your needs - or simple wants - are the same as mine.

Deed (the triple system traitor... ;-) )

I think the Fuji would have grabbed these shots too , but if the camera was setup for it. That's the difference , I'm coming from an A7rIVa , and yes it's more consistent than the X-T5 / XH2 but the difference isn't as drastic as some say. I do agree that the Sony's are easier to use for subject tracking , I guess if I wanted easy I would use my cellphone.

You have done these by holding the screen down? Impressive!

Deed

 

[dccberry]

The focus ability of the X-H2s is the best I have used. Even my X-T3 was an improvement of my Nikon D4 for tracking action. I am still learning the fine points of dialing it in though, for theater / dance work, but this past weekend, it did really well tracking dancers in the Nutcracker. Low light, fast action was no problem, and the client will be happy, which is all that matters in the long run.

 

[10sj03]

Thanks to everyone who has replied. Good information as usual.

My preference is X-T5 because I intend to keep X-T2 as second body. Similar ergonomics. Also, it's $800 cheaper than X-H2S. If X-H2S AF is more reliable, I would get X-H2S. Reliable tracking of the head should be sufficient. The baseball players have helmet and I don't expect the camera able to track eye.

If money, size and weight are no object, I would go back to Canon. I have considered that but changing system is too expensive. Carrying the weight of full-frame gear is too much as well.

I usually start shooting in the beginning of the game. Once I think I got a few good photos, I will put the camera down and enjoy watching the game. With the X-T2, sometimes I came back from the game and the shots I thought were in focus were not.

Having said all that, I may be happy with any of the latest generation AF. I have already lived with the X-T2 for so long and any upgrade would have significant AF improvement.

 

[Waku Waku]

Thanks to everyone who has replied. Good information as usual.

My preference is X-T5 because I intend to keep X-T2 as second body. Similar ergonomics. Also, it's $800 cheaper than X-H2S. If X-H2S AF is more reliable, I would get X-H2S. Reliable tracking of the head should be sufficient. The baseball players have helmet and I don't expect the camera able to track eye.

If money, size and weight are no object, I would go back to Canon. I have considered that but changing system is too expensive. Carrying the weight of full-frame gear is too much as well.

I usually start shooting in the beginning of the game. Once I think I got a few good photos, I will put the camera down and enjoy watching the game. With the X-T2, sometimes I came back from the game and the shots I thought were in focus were not.

Having said all that, I may be happy with any of the latest generation AF. I have already lived with the X-T2 for so long and any upgrade would have significant AF improvement.

If sports is your primary target then I'd go X-H2s, but maybe X-T5 will be sufficient. You'll just have to try out both.

 

[baobob]

DEED

WOULD YOU MiND TO STAY POLITE WHEN YOU ANSWER A POST AND NOT START TO TREAT SILLY a brief comment ??

THX IN ADVANCE !!!!!!

What I meant is exactly what you develop in the same paragraph, there is always a margin of progression.

And the next sarcastic remark targetting to someone who posts here frequently is also out of what should be acceptable here.


Good judgment comes from experience
Experience comes from bad judgment