From 40fps down to approx 13 fps if focus priority was selected according to the video. The 40fps is just a spec sheet decoration from the looks of it and unlikely to be useful enough if the focus misses too often. Fuji was already behind nikon in AF even before the Z9 existed, now they are further behind if the AF in this is just an incremental improvement. It's quite unfortunate given that its capabilities in everything else are pretty solid.

I could say the same for 4k60p video in the Canon R10 too. The 4k60p is just a spec sheet decoration. Heavy crop due to 1:1 pixel readout, where the resulting video will be soft.

I'm not one who cares about AF tracking as a landscape and studio photographer, but when you market a camera using speed and wildlife or sports photography as a selling point, the AF better work reliably and accurately.

I can see your point. At the end of the day Fujifilm is doing the same thing that other companies are doing, right?
And you don’t like it, fair enough, me neither.

Even as a sports Pro I guess that anything north of - say - 20fps is rarely useful. So if they (and others) achieve something like 13-15 fps (with good buffer!) with AF spot on, I think you have a very, very capable sports camera

Agree, Fuji's weak AF is the one of two reasons I never went with them despite great specs. The other has been the dearth of big fast lenses prime or zoom. A 150-600 f/8 does not cut the mustard in my books. Where's the 300 f/2.8, 400 f/4, or 500 f/4 at least. Heck a 600 f/5.6 would be an instant buy from me if the AF was worthy of the new fast sensor.

Front focus and back focus shots are classified as misses. What's the point of this camera again?

The R7 is ok but one generation behind the Fuji.

The lack of a stacked sensor is the key aspect.

It’s not even close really.

@photography-lover: Fujifilm's autofocus system is two generations behind that of the R7. :-)

Sharing the lenses with FF is irrelevant if you are using Fuji APSC lenses because that's their system.

We have no way of knowing how AF will perform until final firmware ships...

Fuji has perks - top plate, better EVF magnification, better fps, af tbd, DR tbd, looks like newer generation sensor, looks like faster readout speeds of sensor.

Better APS-C and 3rd party lens selection if you are not FF.

What's the point of a fast stacked sensor if your AF doesn't work at full speed?

The X-H2 is in a different market segment at a different price. Obviously, the Fuji should have some better hardware and it does (sensor, evf, …).

However, the Canon AF is proven to be good even with a non-stacked sensor. So the R7 is a valid option for many applications, too. And it may not be very likely that Canon ever creates an APS-C high end camera in the same segment as the X-H2. This segment may remain reserved for full frame.

There is no reason to break sweat about which one is better. They both have their target audience.

Huh? It's not DPR's fault that Fujifilm sent them a pre-production camera.

I do not fully understand the complaint.
Pre-production (beta) software is "where the SW is at" just days before the release. If AF has to become better, someone has to actually think how to do an improvement and implement it.
Bugs and missing features, yes., the argument is fine. AF? it is probably 95+% of what it will be.

It’s not Fujifilms fault either - at the end of the day it is our fault. Yes, we, the readers (customers!) request fast, detailed information and push companies like DPR to put out first looks, first tests, preliminary conclusions and so on fast.

In my book: nothing wrong with that. It has been said that the camera is not final, it has been said that they will revisit the things they called somewhat laggy or straight faulty - so no damage done.

Good job DPR Team!

It's unlikely for Fuji to fix a core issue with their platform in the short window before release. But we can certainly check back in a few months...

Will DPReview be publishing eyelash tests on a F0.75 lens with each firmware version, like they do with the A7IV?

Again, I disagree - so sorry. In earlier generations Fujifilm did actually tweak the AF in a way that you could get the feeling to have an entirely new camera - so it is certainly possible.
I agree that I would not expect such drastic improvements between the demo versions and the final release, but still they might correct some glitches that only became obvious in the last couple of weeks before release. Why not…

shhh, that will blow his logic circuits.

@motormatic: Those were my first thoughts, too, and the Fuji lens is even a bit lighter! Still, while this is a 225-900mm f/8.4-12 FF equiv. lens*, the Olympus is significantly faster even in equivalent terms, it's a 300-800mm f/9 equiv. constant aperture lens—with a built-in high-quality converter that makes it a 375-1000mm f/11 equiv. lens which is longer and still faster than the Fuji, even if just a bit. The longest we can get out of them (in equivalent terms) with their respective 2x converters is 450-1800mm f/17-24 for the Fuji and 750-2000mm f/22 for the Olympus.

Anyway, it will be interesting to see how they compare in real life!

* I'm using 1.6x here as crop factor; with the fractional factor Fuji themselves are using it's a tiny bit more.

@TheRealYeats Yes, I can compare it to the 100-400, too. *That* Oly is 30% cheaper than the Fuji but if the e-word is important, it's slower, though not by much. I'm curious how the pixel peeping will turn out.

@NowHearThis Sorry, my logic circuits didn't blow, I'm willing to listen to other viewpoints.

@TheRealYeats - this fuji lens seems more of a higher class of lens than the one you mention. That said, still worth to compare. I can't imagine the Fuji at $1999 being just as good as the $7500.

The Fuji lens is also faster (F-stop quit) than the 100-400 mft.

"Even DXO puts M43 at less than 1/3 of a stop behind the very best APSC sensor"
Hmm that doesn't seem to be true. You need to look at all parameters, not just an overall score because in DR they sure are not 1/3rd of a stop behind.

@NowHearThis- real world performance of sensor advantages? Everything. Yes, that includes DR. You are probably also ignoring color sensitivity here.

@Hubertus - of the last decade? Are you including current best APSC?

Nameless - this camera has not been released yet and actually it is not quite uncommon that companies introduce new cameras and hand it to reviewers with a fw which is still kind of beta

If you've already pre-ordered the R7, means you are already invested in the RF ecosystem (RF FF lenses and camera bodies). I am a Canon shooter, and i don't think Canon wild go wild in APSC RF lenses (you can look back at how they've invested $ in lenses for EF-M, EF-S, same as Nikon for DX).

Photography is expensive, I can't hardly imagine fully investing and committed to 2 different systems.

@PG_Photo

I actually don't care about Canon APS-C lenses. I need R7 for wildlife and plan to use it with Sigma 150-600, which yes, I already have. My only other Canon lens is RF 24-105 F4, and I don't plan to purchaise any APS-C lenses from Canon at all. I maybe will get RF 16 2.8.

I actually now have 2 systems -- Fujifilm GFX and Canon RF. I agree. It's expensive. But I like both. And I think they both got there own place.

I read that Sigma (and probably Tamron) is chatting with Fuji.
The 100-400mm, the 150-600mm (Contemporary & Sport) mirrorless version could be available for X mount in the future.
Gordon L review: https://youtu.be/6zOaWLUbspw

@Andrew - but it's not final. Stable software is not the same as final. Stable enough to test, show. But you can indeed have last minute bugs fixed by release date.

@namelessone - "FUJIFILM X-2HS mirrorless digital camera is expected to be available in early July 2022"

So it hasn't been released yet.