I have used it to shoot indoor high school sports at ISO 6400 and after processing the files with DXO PL6 was very good. There is something about the sensor being ISO invariance but I am not really sure and will hopefully have the time to test
I have an X-T2 and dream about getting a X-H2 at some point. Not a big high iso shooter but the video was educating. Prior to watching this video I had the idea in my head that the X-H2 would blow away the X-T2 in image quality. Even at high iso values the X-T2 seem to hold it's own. At this point I would still like to get the X-H2 simply for its better battery life and ergonomics lol. The X line isn't the best for gripping especially with bigger lenses. Thanks for the video Jason :) Going to sub now!
@@kztraveler It's understandable the X-T2 would have lower noise than the X-H2 due to the pixel density. The X-H2 image quality at lower ISOs is significantly better but not a huge difference, but that's kind of to be expected. The ergonomic though, for me are much better on the X-H2, especially when using larger lenses. I have the 100-400mm and it's really hard to hold and unbalanced on the X-T2 but very comfortable on the X-H2. Well worth keeping the X-T2 though as well if you can
@@JasonRowPhotography I use the XT2 with the Tamron 150-500mm for wildlife, excellent combination! Noise control at higher ISO doesn't match my older DSLR and that's the only drawback.
The XT2 has that “golden hue” that reminds me of the low light images my old X100S would shoot. The images are so close, I think it’s safe to say the XT2 still holds up well in 2023
Hi Jason, Thank you so much for all your XH2/XT2/GFX series ! I watched them all and it's a great ressource for Fuji appreciators like me. I use a GFX50SII and was thinking of buying a X-series camera. Have you compared XH2/XT2 for sharpness and dynamic range at base ISO ? I mainly do macrophotography with flashes, at base ISO, so I would love to know if X-series cameras would be OK along the GFX cameras. Thank you for helping and take good care ! Colin
as a wedding photographer who has been working with fuji for years (xt2 and xpro3), having a new body with so many pixels, only brings disadvantages. First, file storage, more memory cards, more pc space needed and heavier processing on pc (imagine 3000 wedding photos to be archived with a 40 sensor, against 3000 with a 26 sensor. who takes up more storage and cards?). Second, having almost a stop of high ISO operation less is a problem. In Italy there are really dark churches, where even with bright F.1.4 lenses, you work fixed at 3200 ISO. On the 40 mpx sensor, 3200 iso is equivalent to 6400 iso on 26 mpx basically. This is unacceptable for a new model. 40 mpx are for specialist use, not for a universal body. Having more detail is not always better if it brings more noise in certain genres. In print, there are no differences in details, we find them only if we zoom at 200% at PC. fuji's choice to also include them in the xt5 is a huge mistake. Those like me, who would like to use the new technology offered with the new models, or switch to the H2s or have to opt for another system. I really Hope that fuji use the stacked sensor with the xpro4.
Very fair points. It would make sense for the X-Pro 4 to carry the 26mp stacked sensor. The X-Pro series has always been more photographic centric rather than video
What about an XS-20? I think it uses the 26mp sensor. Doubt it uses the stacked sensor though. Man I’m so torn. Fuji has gone and made a bit of a mess with their lineup.
i own an xt2 and i thought the same thing when i went to try an XT5, the dials felt cheap and plastic. holding out for a used xpro 3 or new xpro 4. although im intrigued by xh2
Interesting video ..I hit the like. I chose the X-T2 for astrophotography for it's low light performance. If you check the website "photons to photos", you can see the graphs of input referred read noise versus ISO, even though it's the same sensor as X-T3 and X-T4, the noise in the X-T2 implementation is lower. The IR filter is also weak /sensitive to HA wavelength. The X-T2 doesn't use baked in raw noise reduction, unlike some later Sony cameras I can mention. There is no star crunching in my Fuji images. It's one of the best choices. I just wish Fuji would implement a system like the Pentax astrotracer tracking. That would be worth the move for me. Until then I'll stick with my Made in Japan X-T2. In low light, there aren't many better cameras.
I am no pixel peeper, but the 16-80 seems a good lens. It's the second generation version and not on the X-H2 recommended list but to my eye it's sharp across the board. I am sure the 16-55mm is sharper overall but only if you are looking very closely at large format prints. It's a great focal length range
I've found working with the X-T5 the noise levels are fine at high ISO... mainly because the noise reduction is done on a per pixel level, and there is so much more detail in the noise comparing to the Xtrans 4 and Xtrans 3 and Xtrans 2 the Xtrans 5 raw files have a lot more leeway to work with (in my opinion), also welcome to the North East stay safe and enjoy your time in the Land of the Prince bishops
Thanks, definitely loving the Land of the Prince Bishops, it's a photographer's playground. In the next video I am going to look at how far I can push the Xh2 files compared to the XT2
@@JasonRowPhotography If you are exploring Durham City Centre and you have not found it already, If you walk up to the train station, there is a pathway into a park which houses some of the city walls, from the walls you get a fantastic view back into the city and have both the castle and cathedral in shot (and the train line). I'm from just outside of Durham (mostly a studio based photographer) it is actually nice to see someone from outside the area in Durham, as it reminds me of how nice Durham and the North East is to photograph :)
Unusable is a bit exaggerated according to me… Firstly: DxO Deep Prime does marvels in suppressing noise if needed. And secondly: I’ve never had anyone scrutinize my printings with a magnifying glass to spot the noise. But hey: I’m only printing A3 anyways.
Unusable is a subjective opinion but at ISOs above 6400 you would not need a magnifying glass to see the noise when printed A3. A Secondly and as mentioned in the video these tests were done with absolutely no noise reduction to maintain a fair comparison. I will be doing another video to see how Lightrooms default noise reduction cleans them up. However I doubt many people are going to pay $200 on extra noise reduction software just to clean up a noisy image
@@JasonRowPhotography If DxO is not your main software, you can get Pure Raw for 70 bucks during black friday week. My opinion is simply that noise is one of the slightest problems in Photography. :-)
Shouldn’t both cameras be initially compared at base ISO as the starting point? Your first shot had the X-T2 at base ISO of 200 but not the X-H2 (200 instead of 125)
Do you have an X-H2? Are you happy with it's high ISO capabilities? Let me know in the comments
I have used it to shoot indoor high school sports at ISO 6400 and after processing the files with DXO PL6 was very good. There is something about the sensor being ISO invariance but I am not really sure and will hopefully have the time to test
The ISO invariance is something I want to look at in a future video. The X-T4's invariance seemed pretty decent
I have an X-T2 and dream about getting a X-H2 at some point. Not a big high iso shooter but the video was educating. Prior to watching this video I had the idea in my head that the X-H2 would blow away the X-T2 in image quality. Even at high iso values the X-T2 seem to hold it's own. At this point I would still like to get the X-H2 simply for its better battery life and ergonomics lol. The X line isn't the best for gripping especially with bigger lenses. Thanks for the video Jason :) Going to sub now!
@@kztraveler It's understandable the X-T2 would have lower noise than the X-H2 due to the pixel density. The X-H2 image quality at lower ISOs is significantly better but not a huge difference, but that's kind of to be expected. The ergonomic though, for me are much better on the X-H2, especially when using larger lenses. I have the 100-400mm and it's really hard to hold and unbalanced on the X-T2 but very comfortable on the X-H2. Well worth keeping the X-T2 though as well if you can
@@JasonRowPhotography I use the XT2 with the Tamron 150-500mm for wildlife, excellent combination! Noise control at higher ISO doesn't match my older DSLR and that's the only drawback.
The XT2 has that “golden hue” that reminds me of the low light images my old X100S would shoot. The images are so close, I think it’s safe to say the XT2 still holds up well in 2023
Hi Jason,
Thank you so much for all your XH2/XT2/GFX series !
I watched them all and it's a great ressource for Fuji appreciators like me.
I use a GFX50SII and was thinking of buying a X-series camera.
Have you compared XH2/XT2 for sharpness and dynamic range at base ISO ?
I mainly do macrophotography with flashes, at base ISO, so I would love to know if X-series cameras would be OK along the GFX cameras.
Thank you for helping and take good care !
Colin
as a wedding photographer who has been working with fuji for years (xt2 and xpro3), having a new body with so many pixels, only brings disadvantages. First, file storage, more memory cards, more pc space needed and heavier processing on pc (imagine 3000 wedding photos to be archived with a 40 sensor, against 3000 with a 26 sensor. who takes up more storage and cards?). Second, having almost a stop of high ISO operation less is a problem. In Italy there are really dark churches, where even with bright F.1.4 lenses, you work fixed at 3200 ISO. On the 40 mpx sensor, 3200 iso is equivalent to 6400 iso on 26 mpx basically. This is unacceptable for a new model. 40 mpx are for specialist use, not for a universal body. Having more detail is not always better if it brings more noise in certain genres. In print, there are no differences in details, we find them only if we zoom at 200% at PC. fuji's choice to also include them in the xt5 is a huge mistake. Those like me, who would like to use the new technology offered with the new models, or switch to the H2s or have to opt for another system. I really Hope that fuji use the stacked sensor with the xpro4.
Very fair points. It would make sense for the X-Pro 4 to carry the 26mp stacked sensor. The X-Pro series has always been more photographic centric rather than video
What about an XS-20? I think it uses the 26mp sensor. Doubt it uses the stacked sensor though. Man I’m so torn. Fuji has gone and made a bit of a mess with their lineup.
i own an xt2 and i thought the same thing when i went to try an XT5, the dials felt cheap and plastic. holding out for a used xpro 3 or new xpro 4. although im intrigued by xh2
The XH and XPro series do seem to have better build quality compared to the current XT series
As a stock photographer it’s been a god send but I can see how many pros will prefer the 26mp sweet spot for file size cards etc
I think they will eventually put the 26mp stacked sensor in the X-Pro4
The audio is on the left side only. But thanks for this nonetheless.
Interesting video ..I hit the like. I chose the X-T2 for astrophotography for it's low light performance. If you check the website "photons to photos", you can see the graphs of input referred read noise versus ISO, even though it's the same sensor as X-T3 and X-T4, the noise in the X-T2 implementation is lower. The IR filter is also weak /sensitive to HA wavelength. The X-T2 doesn't use baked in raw noise reduction, unlike some later Sony cameras I can mention. There is no star crunching in my Fuji images. It's one of the best choices. I just wish Fuji would implement a system like the Pentax astrotracer tracking. That would be worth the move for me. Until then I'll stick with my Made in Japan X-T2. In low light, there aren't many better cameras.
X-T2 is still a great camera, I think better than the X-T3 and 4
Seeing your equipment, how does the 16-80 perform with the Xh2?
I am no pixel peeper, but the 16-80 seems a good lens. It's the second generation version and not on the X-H2 recommended list but to my eye it's sharp across the board. I am sure the 16-55mm is sharper overall but only if you are looking very closely at large format prints. It's a great focal length range
@@JasonRowPhotography Thank you for your reply.
Fantastic comparison! Definitely convinced me to hold onto my x-t2 once my x-h2 finally shows up. Thanks for making this!
Glad you enjoyed it. Well worth keeping the X-T2, for a six year old camera, it really punches well above it's weight
I've found working with the X-T5 the noise levels are fine at high ISO... mainly because the noise reduction is done on a per pixel level, and there is so much more detail in the noise
comparing to the Xtrans 4 and Xtrans 3 and Xtrans 2 the Xtrans 5 raw files have a lot more leeway to work with (in my opinion), also welcome to the North East stay safe and enjoy your time in the Land of the Prince bishops
Thanks, definitely loving the Land of the Prince Bishops, it's a photographer's playground. In the next video I am going to look at how far I can push the Xh2 files compared to the XT2
@@JasonRowPhotography If you are exploring Durham City Centre and you have not found it already, If you walk up to the train station, there is a pathway into a park which houses some of the city walls, from the walls you get a fantastic view back into the city and have both the castle and cathedral in shot (and the train line).
I'm from just outside of Durham (mostly a studio based photographer) it is actually nice to see someone from outside the area in Durham, as it reminds me of how nice Durham and the North East is to photograph :)
Thanks for the heads up, I will check it out. I also want to look at Observatory Hill
I don't find the noise to be objectionable. But I grew up with film grain.
I think that up to 6400 it’s very usable. Above that not so much
Me too. And when ISO 400 was considered fast!
Unusable is a bit exaggerated according to me…
Firstly: DxO Deep Prime does marvels in suppressing noise if needed.
And secondly: I’ve never had anyone scrutinize my printings with a magnifying glass to spot the noise. But hey: I’m only printing A3 anyways.
Unusable is a subjective opinion but at ISOs above 6400 you would not need a magnifying glass to see the noise when printed A3. A
Secondly and as mentioned in the video these tests were done with absolutely no noise reduction to maintain a fair comparison. I will be doing another video to see how Lightrooms default noise reduction cleans them up. However I doubt many people are going to pay $200 on extra noise reduction software just to clean up a noisy image
@@JasonRowPhotography If DxO is not your main software, you can get Pure Raw for 70 bucks during black friday week. My opinion is simply that noise is one of the slightest problems in Photography. :-)
Shouldn’t both cameras be initially compared at base ISO as the starting point? Your first shot had the X-T2 at base ISO of 200 but not the X-H2 (200 instead of 125)
No, this is a high ISO test comparision. There would be no point in shooting the X-H2 at 125 as both cameras at low ISOs do not exhibit noise