This is the same video as before, but with the audio fixed. You can find the previous version with it's comments intact here: ua-cam.com/video/KwBjSj-9_WA/v-deo.html
That is great news to me Rob ! I have been looking for UA-cam content for Fuji X mount cameras since I completed my full switch from MFT to Fuji a year ago and i HOPE you will give Fuji some love as you have done to the MFT system. I`m sure you will find the X-H2 a nice camera. I havent looked back since i made the switch and have tryed different bodies (X-T1, X-T2, X-H1, X-E3 and X-H2) and lenses. When the H2 came out almost a year ago I sold my last MFT and ordered one. PLEASE keep up the tecnical view on cameras, deepdive on functions/menus, "real life" test etc. Ill bee back as a subscriber if there is more Fuji content on the way ;-)
I plan on making some fuji content. Still getting to grips with the workflow. But, I have just about filled out my lens collection. Just waiting for the Sigma 10-18 f/2.8 and I'm done.
I like the FOMO concept Rob, I’m sure we can all identify with that and at some point gave way and bought new gear. I have recently done the same but the frustration is I never feel any further forward. As you point out, the output looks pretty much the same.
Hi Rob, I see you using the 45/1.8. Have you ever used a pro-primelens with focallength 17/25/45? I use the 17/1.2 and can compare it directly with my 17/1.8. Without cropping, I can already see a difference because it is clearer/more contrasty and has that pop effect.
I've tried the 25 f/1.2 and it was fantastic. It's just the size/weight that puts me off a little. I may consider the 45mm 1.2, but I think I'd rather get the Sigma 56mm 1.4. For now, I'm quite content with my smaller lenses.
X-H2 is first Fuji that looks great. Not only parameters, but also the body design is finally there! Similar style to my favourite Pentax DLSR. I can see how my current 24Mpix APS-C is already demanding for lens resolution. Lenses that were perfect on 6Mpix K100D, acceptable on 14Mpix K20D and so-so on 16Mpix K5 are now ony good when stopped down. Lets say FA50/1.4. On low res body it was good wide open, on K5 it needed F2 and on K3 the F2.4-F2.8 is the new starting point to get resolution. And I can imagine what 40Mpix can do..
Very useful review. I drove a Fuji XT2 for a year or so and ended up hating the thing, primarily due to the 'traditional controls'. I currently use a pair of Olympus EM1 mk2 bodies with 12-40 f2.8 and 40-150mm f2.8 pro lenses, plus a Panasonic 100-300mm for some sports photography. Noise reduction in DxO Photolab 6 is remarkably good. As I too have small hands, the X-H2 grip could be a deal breaker. I'm also not convinced that I can adequately replace those 2.8 pro lenses with Fuji equivalents. The Olympus 100-400mm is also a real tempter, again with no real competition in the Fuji stable. With weight being a primary concern, I suspect that when the time comes for an upgrade, my money will go on an OM1.
I'm finding the Fuji lenses on the X-H2 a bit frustrating. You really have to get their top tier glass to take advantage of the 40mp. Otherwise, I'm not really seeing much difference. So I compromised and got one "halo" lens for Fuji - the 33mm f/1.4. The rest of my Fuji lenses are nice, but I don't find the images really any better than I'm getting of my Olympus gear.
@@RobTrek That echoes my experience with the XT2 at a mere 24mp. I found the 55-200mm underwhelming to say the least, and the kit 18-55mm was only 'OK'. Neither was a patch on the Olympus f2.8 pro zooms. I'm not a prime lens shooter - my Olympus 45mm f1.8 hasn't seen the light of day for over a year. Therefore, sensibly sized and reasonably fast zooms are a must for me and I really don't see what I need in the Fuji lineup.
It's still early, but generally I found Capture One too give better results with less work. In LR, I have to use the "Enhance" feature to get the best detail which creates a separate DNG file. Others have notice that C1 does a much better job with colors, particularly when pushing highlights/shadows. Personally, I use DxO Photolab 6. It gives similar results as C1. I've don't have enough images yet to see significant differences in color that others have found (pal2tech).
I understand what you wrote me and yes, you are totally right, I am sorry for being too fast with my perception. Many greetings to you and thank you for your reviews and work to all of us, greetings!
Thanks for the feedback. There were so many positive reviews of this camera I gave it the benefit of the doubt when I tried it in the store. There are a lot of things you don't realize until you start using the camera for a while.
I wonder how you would feel if you got to try the Lumix S5 ii. I went from OM-1 to this, and its kept the hand held and tripod high-res modes IN camera, as well as live composite. All in camera and beautiful. With excellent AF- and you get real time LUT's, so there's the Fuji-vibe. It's a brilliant camera, especially for the price.
I'm not sure if I had mentioned it in the video, but I did have the Lumix S5 I, and S1R. Although AF was a minor factor, it was primarily just that I wasn't using the S5 at all and the S1R was too heavy. I will say that the image quality was superb, the hi-res mode is very polished and usable, and I really like the colors from the S1R and the S5 colors were fine. The Panasonic f/1.8 primes are exceptional at any price. I may get back into the L-Mount system in 2024. But no arguments here, the Lumix cameras are excellent.
@@RobTrek Oh nice! I'd love a higher S1R with the features and af of the S5ii tbh, with that higher mpx sensor. Now THAT would be great. Still though, no complaints on the S5ii.
Hi Rob, I'm thinking about getting the X-H2 to use for macro. The detail that comes from the 40mp sensor might be useful when cropping. I was wondering what the experience of focus bracketing with flash on the X-H2 is like, if you have tried it. Does it work as the same as the OM-1?
I don't have a macro lens, so I just used equivalent lenses on the OM-1 and X-H2. The X-H2 focus stacking procedure is a bit convoluted, but a little more flexible. As for flash, it's not much different on both cameras. You can see more detail in the X-H2 shot. You can see full-res it here: flic.kr/p/2q8WRdx & flic.kr/p/2q8QEQP
@@RobTrek Oh brilliant thanks Rob for replying so quickly and spending some of your time to do some sample shots. It's interesting that the X-H2 doesn't massively have more detail in the crop. I was wondering whether moving to this system could be beneficial for insect macro with the extra resolution, but looking into the lenses there is only 1:1 magnifaction lenses with autofocus and there probably wouldn't be that much benefit compare to the OM-1 + 90mm as well as taking into account the crop factor magnification from MFT sensors. I know the Laowa 65mm is a 2:1 magnification lens for X mount and considered the sharpest macro lens for APS-C but it does not have autofocus so stacking would require the old fashion burst shooting while rocking forward.
@Iain_M84 The X-H2 has a pixel pitch of 3.04 microns vs the OM-1 of 3.3 microns. So the X-H2 has more resolution given a perfect lens. The 90mm macro with it's 2x magnification more than compensates for this.
Another thought! Having watched your two videos on low light S-AF and C-AF with the EM1iii and OM1, I was wondering if you have any observations about the low light AF performance of the X-H2. A similar test to that done with the Olympus would, of course, be a big ask!
As a Fuji guy, I recently did something similar but form the other side of the road 😊. I own the X-H2-150/600 combo and I had the chance to try the OM1+150/400 combo in the wild for few hours.Ergonomically speaking I prefer the Fuji (because I’m used to it - I think all bodies need some time to « Feel it »). The custom modes on the Fuji are something to consider seriously - a game changer for me. Back home I could check all photos taken with both systems and (honestly speaking) I was expecting a vow effect from OM because I (still) believe the 150/400 is a best of a lens. But that wasn’t the case. I found all images very noisy (before editing them with DxO) and not sharper than the ones from Fuji. I will try to test the OM system again to be sure I didn’t make something wrong (I was with an OM represent during the test so I assumed the camera was properly configured). Thank Rob for your honest review. By the way, I subscribed to your Flickr account.
Thanks for sharing your experience with the OM1 vs X-H2. I process everything with DxO, regardless of ISO. It mitigates most of the differences in noise, but not all of course. Fine details like feathers and fur can be lost. I have the 300mm f/4 and can get great images (with DxO) up to iso6400 so long as I don't have to crop too much. Otherwise I need to stay under iso1600.
I just sent back the OM-1, I find that OMSytem isn't going on the right slope (and I was a big Oly fan, got my first one in the early 80's). I think that comparing shots between 20 and 40mpix needs to be done at equivalent magnification. The iso 3200-6400 are better on the Fuji and the dynamic is better on the Fuiji that makes sense because it's a larger sensor. The H2 is definitively not a fast camera, the H2S is made for that. 40 mpix are useful for croping and large prints. Also 14 bits raws allow deeper editing that 12bits raw. I have a P1 with old 60mpix CCD with 16 bits raw and the difference is major compared to the OM-1. I've been very disappointed by the OM-1 (I'm not a bird or a sport shooter) and was sad to send it back. As you said 20 mpix is more than enough if you don't need to crop or do large prints. But depending of what you shoot the extra pixels make the difference.
It's sad you did it. I was disappointed in the beginning too. It took me half a year until I found the way to make the camera perform as I wanted. I don't know why, but inte beginning the photos were crappy, now they are excellent. And I haven't changed the menu as far as I know. Now I really love the camera more and more. My friends have Fuji, Nikon and Sony. And I get as good result as them, despite they are better photographers. I love the fact I make it when they struggle. And I love my Olympus collection. I hate the Sony ergonomics, I hate the in my opinion bulky Nikon that makes not good photos. I hope you will be happy,but I fear you only love specs.
Thanks for sharing your experience. The extra pixels can be seen and does help when cropping to show fine details. Obviously the P1 is in a different league and I wouldn't be surprised if it crushed most cameras, let alone the OM1. As I get older, my tolerance for noise and resolution is getting higher. It doesn't bother me as much as it used to. 99% of what I deliver is in the 2-5mp range for online display. Anything more is an academic exercise for me. Still, there is a certain amount of satisfaction in shooting at higher resolutions and bit depth. Whether it's the flexibility in post processing or just appreciating the technology available to us.
Would you like to see OM systems bring out an all new OM-2 with only a 24 or 26 stacked sensor and all new image processor and sharing the same body as the OM-1 If they could only bring out such a camera by early, March 2024.
@@RobTrek hi Rob! I think that 41mp would be the number for 8k. 33 mp would translatate on a 16:9 Sensor. I would be Happy with a stacked bsi 24mp sensor for 5.7k.
@@TITAOSTEIN That makes sense. A 41mp m4/3 sensor would need a pixel pitch well under 2 microns! That would not only drive the fabrication price way up (I think), but also increase noise.
Thanks Rob for your review. I think that the big difference is between micro 43 and FF and not to APSC format. I remembered when I had the legend nikon D700 I dint worry about going to 6400!iso but with my gx9 and em5 and 10 mark ii the 3200 is the limit.
Hi i have a fujifilm xt1 n image is very good on xt1 then when i shoot on my olympus em10 mark1 n lumix g7 with 14mm f2.5 or the kit lens 14 412mm the images are not as good as xt1 should i keep mft or go with fujifilm
I don't think you can go wrong either way. If you like doing birds in flight or animals, the OM-1 is performing better than my X-H2 so far. For general photography, I don't see any reason for you to upgrade your current cameras. Unless you need a specific feature, your money is much better spend upgrading your lenses.
Rob, another fantastic review. You know, I actually cannot afford any of the cameras or lenses you talk about in the video, but if I were considering buying one and had to choose between the OM and the Fuji, your video would certainly be of great help. Please, keep up the excellent work.
As a former Olympus shooter. Starting with the EP1 and all the OMD cameras. Also was a Fuji shooter. But the cameras continue to get bigger and bigger over time. We’ve lost the promise of mirrorless being smaller. So, for me APSC and Micro four thirds have lost their appeal. With the release of the Sony A7CII and the A7R. For general photography there is no advantage to the smaller formats. The only place I see an advantage is for wild life or sports shooters that want the crop factor. Sony, sigma, and several other companies have small primes as small or smaller than the Olympus or Fuji counterparts.
Thanks for sharing your experience. I think there is still a significant cost savings in the smaller formats. The gap between m43 and apsc has narrowed. Broadly speaking, I'd say apsc is even beating m43 in price/performance/features. But the FF market is basically under no threat from the smaller formats. Relatively compact kits can be had at reasonable prices. Moving higher-end in the FF market and any arguments on size/weight/price is offset by performance and image quality.
Remember FF lenses are not worth the weight or price unless you’re after sub f2.4 depth of field. Also note that the big three only dedicate the best lens tech to the full frame lenses, treating apsc lenses like step kids. In contrast, all Olympus top of line lenses are MADE for m43
@@dayeah765caoni3 Sony makes some great and small lenes at 1.8. Sigma makes several in their I-series that are small and fast. Samyang in their tiny series make several 1.8 primes that are optically great. So you don’t have to get big with full frame lenes. I typically shot 1.8 lenses on my Olympus and was happy with the results. 1.8 on full frame would be even better. As I said for me the smaller formats have lost their appeal as they’ve gotten bigger and heavier.
For video, Om has good ibis but its skintone is always off and required post processing. Gh6 and Xh2s are the two best video centric cameras until,,,,G92
I have been watching some of your videos for a while now. I enjoy them very much probably because they are entertaining as much as educating. However on this particular one I must say that I don't get it. Your comment about the "holding platform" or whatever the name it may have (yes that thing with a light that warns us of some activity). So you can't reach some buttons... I figured that with two hands on this big camera, you can easily loosen the grip from one of the hands to reach the unreachables, then re-tighten your grip. The thing is that you need two hands to operate this camera, since it has buttons and levers all over the place. It feels like a professional camera (for me it does, anyway) so you shouldn't treat it like a "point and shoot" camera like a TG-5. Sorry for this, but I have big hands and I still hold my X-T5 (unlike you, I prefer the big buttons on top) with two hands so I can use the controls more easily. Keep entertaining and teaching. Thank you. Oh!, and thinking about it, if you go "touch screen", you can act like using the joystick and the shutter both at the same time. That should be more convenient for you (unless you don't like touch screens). Check your setting for "release focus priority". Mine is set to release only when focus is achieved. Then the problem should only be with "where was the focus achieved". 40 Megapixels I find this great for cropping (re-composing), since I tend to succeed more with composition after the fact than during the shoot. With this sensor, the image remains great. I find that the way the 160 Megapixels works on the X-T5 (and X-H2) is supposed to be about true color rendition by grabbing all the colours at each pixel space by shifting the sensor. It makes perfect sense but like you say, only for perfectly still subjects. Not quite the same intention as the OM1, I guess. X-H2 already has 40 Megapixels which the OM1 is now very far from. Funny how I looked at OM1 a lot before falling for X-T5. OM1 is more like my dream camera, while X-T5 is more the tool I needed to re-compose after the fact. What can I say, I'm only trying to be better and it isn't as easy as it seems (when I watch people like you doing your magic). Nice video, thank you very much.
Thanks for taking the time to write. I'm getting used to the size of the camera and these little ergonomic challenges I have are not a big deal. As you say, two handed operation mitigates most of the issues with my small hands. However, repositioning my grip to make adjustments takes my finger off the shutter button where I have missed shots in very fast paced shooting. Again, not a big deal. I don't really do sports/action with this camera. The 40mp definitely resolves great detail with the right lenses and conditions. It's more than enough for me so I don't really need to bother with the 160mp. I may experiment more with 160mp just for fun. I have set the focus release to focus achieved only. Not a fan of touch screens but do use them when on a tripod. I'm not very proficient with touch screens when handheld. I'm looking at X-T3 for a smaller walk around Fuji. I didn't like the X-T30 but the X-T3 has always appealed to me despite my aversion to the top dials. I like them on my film cameras, but I just think digital should be arranged more like the X-H2 or X-S20.
The magic are the lenses indeed. I had a small, unpretentious X-T20. Shooting mainly the 35mm XC (plastic) lens. When a friend gave me to try the new 18/1.4 boy, oh boy! It transformed my camera! A bit big and heavy, but so much sharper and with much better colors and contrast. He told me the new f/1.4 lenses, that have WR marking, are all noticeably better. But when I saw the prices, I sold the camera 😄
I'm starting to know how you feel. I'm getting amazing results with moderately priced lenses on my m4/3. While the images from my moderately priced lenses for fuji are fine, they are significantly better with the new f/1.4s'. But wow, the prices are giving me pause.
I find it incredibly fustrating> all the confusing names given to cameras. Even if I had a ton of $, I would barely know where too begin. I guess this system makes profits for manufacturers?> Keep the consumer confused...
In short, a collection of arguments of varying degrees of relevance and good faith to demonstrate that the Olympus OM1 really is better. Too bad it's a dead end...
This is the same video as before, but with the audio fixed. You can find the previous version with it's comments intact here: ua-cam.com/video/KwBjSj-9_WA/v-deo.html
That is great news to me Rob ! I have been looking for UA-cam content for Fuji X mount cameras since I completed my full switch from MFT to Fuji a year ago and i HOPE you will give Fuji some love as you have done to the MFT system. I`m sure you will find the X-H2 a nice camera. I havent looked back since i made the switch and have tryed different bodies (X-T1, X-T2, X-H1, X-E3 and X-H2) and lenses. When the H2 came out almost a year ago I sold my last MFT and ordered one. PLEASE keep up the tecnical view on cameras, deepdive on functions/menus, "real life" test etc. Ill bee back as a subscriber if there is more Fuji content on the way ;-)
I plan on making some fuji content. Still getting to grips with the workflow. But, I have just about filled out my lens collection. Just waiting for the Sigma 10-18 f/2.8 and I'm done.
The best most honest unbiased video yet. Thanks.
I appreciate that!
I like the FOMO concept Rob, I’m sure we can all identify with that and at some point gave way and bought new gear. I have recently done the same but the frustration is I never feel any further forward. As you point out, the output looks pretty much the same.
I don't regret getting the X-H2. But it's going to take some time for me to appreciate the differences in what I shoot, if any.
Thank you, Rob, the great review. I’m planning on getting the X-H2 this summer. Can’t wait! 😌
Hi Rob, I see you using the 45/1.8. Have you ever used a pro-primelens with focallength 17/25/45? I use the 17/1.2 and can compare it directly with my 17/1.8. Without cropping, I can already see a difference because it is clearer/more contrasty and has that pop effect.
I've tried the 25 f/1.2 and it was fantastic. It's just the size/weight that puts me off a little. I may consider the 45mm 1.2, but I think I'd rather get the Sigma 56mm 1.4. For now, I'm quite content with my smaller lenses.
X-H2 is first Fuji that looks great. Not only parameters, but also the body design is finally there! Similar style to my favourite Pentax DLSR.
I can see how my current 24Mpix APS-C is already demanding for lens resolution. Lenses that were perfect on 6Mpix K100D, acceptable on 14Mpix K20D and so-so on 16Mpix K5 are now ony good when stopped down. Lets say FA50/1.4. On low res body it was good wide open, on K5 it needed F2 and on K3 the F2.4-F2.8 is the new starting point to get resolution. And I can imagine what 40Mpix can do..
Thanks for your feedback.
Very useful review. I drove a Fuji XT2 for a year or so and ended up hating the thing, primarily due to the 'traditional controls'. I currently use a pair of Olympus EM1 mk2 bodies with 12-40 f2.8 and 40-150mm f2.8 pro lenses, plus a Panasonic 100-300mm for some sports photography. Noise reduction in DxO Photolab 6 is remarkably good. As I too have small hands, the X-H2 grip could be a deal breaker. I'm also not convinced that I can adequately replace those 2.8 pro lenses with Fuji equivalents. The Olympus 100-400mm is also a real tempter, again with no real competition in the Fuji stable. With weight being a primary concern, I suspect that when the time comes for an upgrade, my money will go on an OM1.
I'm finding the Fuji lenses on the X-H2 a bit frustrating. You really have to get their top tier glass to take advantage of the 40mp. Otherwise, I'm not really seeing much difference. So I compromised and got one "halo" lens for Fuji - the 33mm f/1.4. The rest of my Fuji lenses are nice, but I don't find the images really any better than I'm getting of my Olympus gear.
@@RobTrek That echoes my experience with the XT2 at a mere 24mp. I found the 55-200mm underwhelming to say the least, and the kit 18-55mm was only 'OK'. Neither was a patch on the Olympus f2.8 pro zooms. I'm not a prime lens shooter - my Olympus 45mm f1.8 hasn't seen the light of day for over a year. Therefore, sensibly sized and reasonably fast zooms are a must for me and I really don't see what I need in the Fuji lineup.
Hi. Have you used capture one or Adobe Lightroom to develop images from Fuji? c1 is known to better handle the xtrans.
It's still early, but generally I found Capture One too give better results with less work. In LR, I have to use the "Enhance" feature to get the best detail which creates a separate DNG file. Others have notice that C1 does a much better job with colors, particularly when pushing highlights/shadows. Personally, I use DxO Photolab 6. It gives similar results as C1. I've don't have enough images yet to see significant differences in color that others have found (pal2tech).
I understand what you wrote me and yes, you are totally right, I am sorry for being too fast with my perception. Many greetings to you and thank you for your reviews and work to all of us, greetings!
Thanks for the feedback. There were so many positive reviews of this camera I gave it the benefit of the doubt when I tried it in the store. There are a lot of things you don't realize until you start using the camera for a while.
@@RobTrek I changed my comments! I am sorry! Greetings and thank you!
@@papa.alfredo No worries. 1st impressions from viewers are important and I respect comments whether they are positive or negative.
I wonder how you would feel if you got to try the Lumix S5 ii. I went from OM-1 to this, and its kept the hand held and tripod high-res modes IN camera, as well as live composite. All in camera and beautiful. With excellent AF- and you get real time LUT's, so there's the Fuji-vibe. It's a brilliant camera, especially for the price.
I'm not sure if I had mentioned it in the video, but I did have the Lumix S5 I, and S1R. Although AF was a minor factor, it was primarily just that I wasn't using the S5 at all and the S1R was too heavy. I will say that the image quality was superb, the hi-res mode is very polished and usable, and I really like the colors from the S1R and the S5 colors were fine. The Panasonic f/1.8 primes are exceptional at any price. I may get back into the L-Mount system in 2024. But no arguments here, the Lumix cameras are excellent.
@@RobTrek Oh nice! I'd love a higher S1R with the features and af of the S5ii tbh, with that higher mpx sensor. Now THAT would be great. Still though, no complaints on the S5ii.
Hi Rob, I'm thinking about getting the X-H2 to use for macro. The detail that comes from the 40mp sensor might be useful when cropping. I was wondering what the experience of focus bracketing with flash on the X-H2 is like, if you have tried it. Does it work as the same as the OM-1?
I don't have a macro lens, so I just used equivalent lenses on the OM-1 and X-H2. The X-H2 focus stacking procedure is a bit convoluted, but a little more flexible. As for flash, it's not much different on both cameras. You can see more detail in the X-H2 shot. You can see full-res it here: flic.kr/p/2q8WRdx & flic.kr/p/2q8QEQP
@@RobTrek Oh brilliant thanks Rob for replying so quickly and spending some of your time to do some sample shots. It's interesting that the X-H2 doesn't massively have more detail in the crop. I was wondering whether moving to this system could be beneficial for insect macro with the extra resolution, but looking into the lenses there is only 1:1 magnifaction lenses with autofocus and there probably wouldn't be that much benefit compare to the OM-1 + 90mm as well as taking into account the crop factor magnification from MFT sensors. I know the Laowa 65mm is a 2:1 magnification lens for X mount and considered the sharpest macro lens for APS-C but it does not have autofocus so stacking would require the old fashion burst shooting while rocking forward.
@Iain_M84 The X-H2 has a pixel pitch of 3.04 microns vs the OM-1 of 3.3 microns. So the X-H2 has more resolution given a perfect lens. The 90mm macro with it's 2x magnification more than compensates for this.
Another thought! Having watched your two videos on low light S-AF and C-AF with the EM1iii and OM1, I was wondering if you have any observations about the low light AF performance of the X-H2. A similar test to that done with the Olympus would, of course, be a big ask!
If you want to try out a few fuji lenses I have a few ones you'll probably be interested in, in a variety of price points.
Thanks, Lauren. Email me rob @ robtrek.com Let me know what you have and how much.
As a Fuji guy, I recently did something similar but form the other side of the road 😊. I own the X-H2-150/600 combo and I had the chance to try the OM1+150/400 combo in the wild for few hours.Ergonomically speaking I prefer the Fuji (because I’m used to it - I think all bodies need some time to « Feel it »). The custom modes on the Fuji are something to consider seriously - a game changer for me. Back home I could check all photos taken with both systems and (honestly speaking) I was expecting a vow effect from OM because I (still) believe the 150/400 is a best of a lens. But that wasn’t the case. I found all images very noisy (before editing them with DxO) and not sharper than the ones from Fuji. I will try to test the OM system again to be sure I didn’t make something wrong (I was with an OM represent during the test so I assumed the camera was properly configured). Thank Rob for your honest review. By the way, I subscribed to your Flickr account.
Thanks for sharing your experience with the OM1 vs X-H2. I process everything with DxO, regardless of ISO. It mitigates most of the differences in noise, but not all of course. Fine details like feathers and fur can be lost. I have the 300mm f/4 and can get great images (with DxO) up to iso6400 so long as I don't have to crop too much. Otherwise I need to stay under iso1600.
That's a beautiful X-H2! I'll never give up my Olympus Cameras, but my next camera will be the Medium format Fujifilm GFX50S II for my home studio.
I lust for the GFX cameras. Just a bit out of my budget when adding on the lenses....for now.
I just sent back the OM-1, I find that OMSytem isn't going on the right slope (and I was a big Oly fan, got my first one in the early 80's). I think that comparing shots between 20 and 40mpix needs to be done at equivalent magnification. The iso 3200-6400 are better on the Fuji and the dynamic is better on the Fuiji that makes sense because it's a larger sensor. The H2 is definitively not a fast camera, the H2S is made for that. 40 mpix are useful for croping and large prints. Also 14 bits raws allow deeper editing that 12bits raw. I have a P1 with old 60mpix CCD with 16 bits raw and the difference is major compared to the OM-1. I've been very disappointed by the OM-1 (I'm not a bird or a sport shooter) and was sad to send it back. As you said 20 mpix is more than enough if you don't need to crop or do large prints. But depending of what you shoot the extra pixels make the difference.
It's sad you did it. I was disappointed in the beginning too. It took me half a year until I found the way to make the camera perform as I wanted. I don't know why, but inte beginning the photos were crappy, now they are excellent. And I haven't changed the menu as far as I know.
Now I really love the camera more and more. My friends have Fuji, Nikon and Sony. And I get as good result as them, despite they are better photographers. I love the fact I make it when they struggle. And I love my Olympus collection. I hate the Sony ergonomics, I hate the in my opinion bulky Nikon that makes not good photos.
I hope you will be happy,but I fear you only love specs.
Thanks for sharing your experience. The extra pixels can be seen and does help when cropping to show fine details. Obviously the P1 is in a different league and I wouldn't be surprised if it crushed most cameras, let alone the OM1. As I get older, my tolerance for noise and resolution is getting higher. It doesn't bother me as much as it used to. 99% of what I deliver is in the 2-5mp range for online display. Anything more is an academic exercise for me. Still, there is a certain amount of satisfaction in shooting at higher resolutions and bit depth. Whether it's the flexibility in post processing or just appreciating the technology available to us.
Would you like to see OM systems bring out an all new OM-2 with only a 24 or 26 stacked sensor and all new image processor and sharing the same body as the OM-1 If they could only bring out such a camera by early, March 2024.
I'd like 33mp so they can get 8k video on the sheet. Anything less would not be worth the compromise in low light iq.
@@RobTrek hi Rob! I think that 41mp would be the number for 8k. 33 mp would translatate on a 16:9 Sensor. I would be Happy with a stacked bsi 24mp sensor for 5.7k.
@@TITAOSTEIN That makes sense. A 41mp m4/3 sensor would need a pixel pitch well under 2 microns! That would not only drive the fabrication price way up (I think), but also increase noise.
Thanks Rob for your review. I think that the big difference is between micro 43 and FF and not to APSC format. I remembered when I had the legend nikon D700 I dint worry about going to 6400!iso but with my gx9 and em5 and 10 mark ii the 3200 is the limit.
The d700 was definitely magic! I still have my Nikon Df for the same reason. The images are sublime.
Hi i have a fujifilm xt1 n image is very good on xt1 then when i shoot on my olympus em10 mark1 n lumix g7 with 14mm f2.5 or the kit lens 14 412mm the images are not as good as xt1 should i keep mft or go with fujifilm
I don't think you can go wrong either way. If you like doing birds in flight or animals, the OM-1 is performing better than my X-H2 so far. For general photography, I don't see any reason for you to upgrade your current cameras. Unless you need a specific feature, your money is much better spend upgrading your lenses.
Rob, another fantastic review. You know, I actually cannot afford any of the cameras or lenses you talk about in the video, but if I were considering buying one and had to choose between the OM and the Fuji, your video would certainly be of great help. Please, keep up the excellent work.
Thank you!
Wow Rob what I surprise. No idea you shot Fuji.
A little bit.
Hey, I hope you're doing well. Are you planning any unplanned live shows for the near future?.. Asking for a friend :)
I don't have any plans for unplanned streams. I try to do one on the last Sunday of each month.
As a former Olympus shooter. Starting with the EP1 and all the OMD cameras. Also was a Fuji shooter. But the cameras continue to get bigger and bigger over time. We’ve lost the promise of mirrorless being smaller. So, for me APSC and Micro four thirds have lost their appeal. With the release of the Sony A7CII and the A7R. For general photography there is no advantage to the smaller formats. The only place I see an advantage is for wild life or sports shooters that want the crop factor. Sony, sigma, and several other companies have small primes as small or smaller than the Olympus or Fuji counterparts.
Thanks for sharing your experience. I think there is still a significant cost savings in the smaller formats. The gap between m43 and apsc has narrowed. Broadly speaking, I'd say apsc is even beating m43 in price/performance/features. But the FF market is basically under no threat from the smaller formats. Relatively compact kits can be had at reasonable prices. Moving higher-end in the FF market and any arguments on size/weight/price is offset by performance and image quality.
Remember FF lenses are not worth the weight or price unless you’re after sub f2.4 depth of field. Also note that the big three only dedicate the best lens tech to the full frame lenses, treating apsc lenses like step kids. In contrast, all Olympus top of line lenses are MADE for m43
@@dayeah765caoni3 Sony makes some great and small lenes at 1.8. Sigma makes several in their I-series that are small and fast. Samyang in their tiny series make several 1.8 primes that are optically great. So you don’t have to get big with full frame lenes. I typically shot 1.8 lenses on my Olympus and was happy with the results. 1.8 on full frame would be even better. As I said for me the smaller formats have lost their appeal as they’ve gotten bigger and heavier.
For video, Om has good ibis but its skintone is always off and required post processing. Gh6 and Xh2s are the two best video centric cameras until,,,,G92
I hear a GH7 is not far away!
I have been watching some of your videos for a while now. I enjoy them very much probably because they are entertaining as much as educating. However on this particular one I must say that I don't get it. Your comment about the "holding platform" or whatever the name it may have (yes that thing with a light that warns us of some activity). So you can't reach some buttons... I figured that with two hands on this big camera, you can easily loosen the grip from one of the hands to reach the unreachables, then re-tighten your grip. The thing is that you need two hands to operate this camera, since it has buttons and levers all over the place. It feels like a professional camera (for me it does, anyway) so you shouldn't treat it like a "point and shoot" camera like a TG-5. Sorry for this, but I have big hands and I still hold my X-T5 (unlike you, I prefer the big buttons on top) with two hands so I can use the controls more easily.
Keep entertaining and teaching. Thank you.
Oh!, and thinking about it, if you go "touch screen", you can act like using the joystick and the shutter both at the same time. That should be more convenient for you (unless you don't like touch screens).
Check your setting for "release focus priority". Mine is set to release only when focus is achieved. Then the problem should only be with "where was the focus achieved".
40 Megapixels I find this great for cropping (re-composing), since I tend to succeed more with composition after the fact than during the shoot. With this sensor, the image remains great.
I find that the way the 160 Megapixels works on the X-T5 (and X-H2) is supposed to be about true color rendition by grabbing all the colours at each pixel space by shifting the sensor. It makes perfect sense but like you say, only for perfectly still subjects. Not quite the same intention as the OM1, I guess. X-H2 already has 40 Megapixels which the OM1 is now very far from.
Funny how I looked at OM1 a lot before falling for X-T5. OM1 is more like my dream camera, while X-T5 is more the tool I needed to re-compose after the fact. What can I say, I'm only trying to be better and it isn't as easy as it seems (when I watch people like you doing your magic).
Nice video, thank you very much.
Thanks for taking the time to write. I'm getting used to the size of the camera and these little ergonomic challenges I have are not a big deal. As you say, two handed operation mitigates most of the issues with my small hands. However, repositioning my grip to make adjustments takes my finger off the shutter button where I have missed shots in very fast paced shooting. Again, not a big deal. I don't really do sports/action with this camera. The 40mp definitely resolves great detail with the right lenses and conditions. It's more than enough for me so I don't really need to bother with the 160mp. I may experiment more with 160mp just for fun. I have set the focus release to focus achieved only. Not a fan of touch screens but do use them when on a tripod. I'm not very proficient with touch screens when handheld. I'm looking at X-T3 for a smaller walk around Fuji. I didn't like the X-T30 but the X-T3 has always appealed to me despite my aversion to the top dials. I like them on my film cameras, but I just think digital should be arranged more like the X-H2 or X-S20.
The magic are the lenses indeed. I had a small, unpretentious X-T20. Shooting mainly the 35mm XC (plastic) lens. When a friend gave me to try the new 18/1.4 boy, oh boy! It transformed my camera! A bit big and heavy, but so much sharper and with much better colors and contrast. He told me the new f/1.4 lenses, that have WR marking, are all noticeably better. But when I saw the prices, I sold the camera 😄
I'm starting to know how you feel. I'm getting amazing results with moderately priced lenses on my m4/3. While the images from my moderately priced lenses for fuji are fine, they are significantly better with the new f/1.4s'. But wow, the prices are giving me pause.
I find it incredibly fustrating> all the confusing names given to cameras. Even if I had a ton of $, I would barely know where too begin. I guess this system makes profits for manufacturers?> Keep the consumer confused...
In short, a collection of arguments of varying degrees of relevance and good faith to demonstrate that the Olympus OM1 really is better. Too bad it's a dead end...
That about sums it up.