This post can't be from the friendly and polite AlanF we know.
Has your computer been hacked?
Upvote
0
Industry News: Fujifilm Introduces the flagship X-H2S
- Thread starter Canon Rumors Guy
- Start date
Has your computer been hacked?
H2S smells like rotten eggs, and is the stink gas used by schoolboys for generations. A bit of a marketing disaster by Fuji. To think that they were once a company using chemicals.This post can't be from the friendly and polite AlanF we know.
Has your computer been hacked?
Last edited:
Upvote
0
Why Fudzi stuff on Canon forum? Is DPR not enough to read such kind of news and make comparisons?
Oh, poor Fudzi, they still didn't drop X-TraMs.
Is DPR not enough to read such kind of news and make comparisons?Oh, poor Fudzi, they still didn't drop X-TraMs.
Upvote
0
Upvote
0
Interesting article, thanks for posting the link. However, to your original statement, the article cites GPS as an example of a function that can’t be offloaded to the cloud.
Upvote
0
I'm still very happy with preordering the R7. The price of the H2S is nearly two times of the R7. For videographers it could be reasonable to buy the H2S. But as a stills only (which I am) I don't think so. Regarding the first reviews the AF of the H2S is "inconsistent". Maybe it's because it is pre-production, but I rather think fuji just failed to close the gap to Canon and Sony ... time will tell.
Upvote
0
I wouldn't consider the Fujifilm simply because I'm already deep into Canon with an R5 and several RF/EF lenses.
The R7 has decent specs, but I much prefer the R5/R6 ergonomics to those of the R7.
I really wish that Canon had a pro-quality APS with Fujifilm-level specs, rather than the half-hearted compromise which is the R7.
Nevertheless, I'll check out the R7 when it hits the stores and may end up getting one, as it's affordable as a backup to the R5, and a better option than keeping my 5DMkiv and EF glass as backup.
Upvote
0
Yep! I warn everyone making the switch to be prepared to take a major step backwards in autofocus. Fuji users are actually beginning to feel like the worst camera fans out there because if you say ANYTHING negative about their cameras, they harass you endlessly. I posted a negative review about a lens, the XF27mm f/2.8 WR R lens on DPReview and it offended the moderator so much that my account ended up being suspended. I just highlighted the worst focus breathing of any lens I’ve ever used and the really poor minimum focusing distance. Thought the lens was overrated and sold it….this sent them into a temper tantrum of harassment about how sharp and compact the lens was and that comes with a trade off!! Haha I said that the Canon EF-M 22mm f/2 had none of these issues, cost less money, and was almost identical in size - still being called a pancake lens. Oh well!
The autofocus on X-H2S that I’m seeing is still pretty bad and laggy. Then you hear the reviewer say they’ve caught up to or are showing boxes on ear subjects further out than Canon/Sony….then you look at the footage and it’s a mess. Haha The reviewers are just pathetic and dishonest people looking to capitalize on thei affiliate links for preorder. Why Fujifilm can’t get their autofocus to just stick to a single subject is beyond me.
I would also like to highlight that as great as the video features are with this camera, very VERY VERY few of Fuji’s lenses are even usable as video lenses. Zooms fake being parfocal by adjusting the focus as you zoom…which comes in odd pulses of focus and makes all footage unusable if you zoom. Manual focus on all lenses I’ve owned/used (including the latest LM) is also done in pulses so you can’t actually perform a smooth manual focus transition - for some reason autofocus can achieve this, but now manually pulling?
I could go on and on. But if I am 100% honest, I truthfully don’t believe I’ve ever had more fun shooting a digital camera than when I walk around with a Fuji. It makes it the perfect recreational and fun camera to own for me…but it’s not ready for prime time professional use - at least not for me shooting motorsports, automotive, commercial, and real estate photo/video on a daily basis.
Upvote
0
Good find, AlanF...
I wonder how suitable Fuji's latest effort, the X-H2S, will fare as far as astrophotography is concerned
...from:
Hydrogen Sulfide | NIOSH | CDC
Hydrogen sulfide (H₂S) is a colorless gas with a strong odor of rotten eggs. Exposure to hydrogen sulfide may cause irritation to the eyes and respiratory system.
www.cdc.gov
"Hydrogen sulfide (H₂S) is a colorless gas with a strong odor of rotten eggs. Exposure to hydrogen sulfide may cause irritation to the eyes and respiratory system. It can also cause apnea, coma, convulsions; dizziness, headache, weakness, irritability, insomnia; stomach upset, and if liquid: frostbite."
Upvote
0
I really like the look of Fujifilm products. Then I try them and the AF, colors and menus send me running. IMHO, It's not wrong to think that for some people it's an extension of their personality as opposed to a tool in which to create images.
Look at me and my camera!
Look at me and my camera!
Upvote
0
Great post...well-written with your detailed impressions, the impressions of a working photographer with hands-on experience that I sense is worth trusting (no snark).
Elsewhere here you mentioned swapping your M gear for Fuji...which Ms did you own...which lenses...and you are (and remain) satisfied with the switch?
Also, I would really like to see the text of the review (XF27mm f/2.8 ?) you wrote that a moderator at DPR found objectionable.
And the DPR response, as well.
I tend not to lean conspiratorial about these things (for personal reasons relating to two+ decades of my own internet-related webmaster experience) and also, on a site like DPR, I sort of 'want to believe' what I'm reading.
I have no reason not to believe what you posted, though, and the real world is a tough, tough place at times. I guess I'd rather not know how hot dogs are made!
=====
Perhaps tangentially related:
Most but not all of those reading this board probably live in areas of the world where professional sports are a big deal.
Here in the United States, a number of sports teams have significant (and in some cases controlling) ownership of the television networks that televise their games.
A couple or three years ago, the Chicago Cubs major league baseball team started their own network: Marquee.
No more than a month ago, Marquee started up a new show: "The Reporters".
It turns out that Marquee broadcasts 24 hours a day...and is desperate for programming in addition to the live Cubs games.
The following passage is taken from the Chicago Tribune (link at the end):
=====
But some wondered how much candor reporters could exercise on Cubs-related topics while on a station run by the Cubs and Sinclair. Would a reporter be allowed to criticize the spending of Chairman Tom Ricketts? Could anyone say manager David Ross was an issue? Would the Cubs run interference to make sure top executives weren’t ripped?
One of those questions was answered Sunday. No, the network would not let a reporter criticize upper management — specifically Hoyer. [added for context: the team's General Manager and President]
Sunday’s show featured three veteran reporters: WSCR-AM 670′s David Haugh, the Chicago Sun-Times’ Maddie Lee and former sports anchor Peggy Kusinski. They were joined by WGN-AM 720 personality Bob Sirott, who was the moderator.
Sources said a segment on the Cubs’ unknown trade-deadline plans was going smoothly until Haugh, a former Tribune columnist, and Kusinski, who has a weekly show on WMVP-AM 1000, discussed the rebuild.
Haugh said Hoyer’s transparency was “lacking,” comparing it unfavorably with the job former President Theo Epstein did in explaining his game plan. Haugh wondered aloud if Hoyer was “tethered to reality” and asked for some clarity from the Cubs president. Kusinski agreed and called for “honesty.”
“That was the wrong term,” Kusinski told the Tribune.
The taping was abruptly halted shortly thereafter for what the reporters were told was a technical difficulty. They were then informed they would have to start the segment all over.
Before they began taping again, the reporters were told not to mention the “transparency” angle in the new segment.
“They kept saying, ‘Stick to what Jed [Hoyer] said (during a group interview last week),’” Kusinski said.
They avoided the subject and the original segment was edited out when the show aired Sunday morning.
:quality(70)/cloudfront-us-east-1.images.arcpublishing.com/tronc/RAIRXD6ONNBMJHUJXYULMD7IYU.jpg)
Column: Criticize the Chicago Cubs? Not on Marquee Sports Network’s ‘The Reporters’ show.
No, Marquee Sports Network would not let a reporter criticize Chicago Cubs upper management — specifically Jed Hoyer.
www.chicagotribune.com
=====
The resolution of this problem for Marquee is that the show is now being aired 'live'...and Cubs management has stated publicly that there will be no interference from team executives on the program.
What you have described, LSXPhotog (your posting privileges were revoked?) really makes me wonder. I feel like I have a discerning eye but how can I discern what I am not allowed to see?
My oh my...and I hope this makes sense.
Upvote
0
Upvote
0
I had the M5 (still have it, actually) and owned the M6 Mark II three times. (Long story there) Yes, I’m still satisfied with the switch, but the autofocus from Fujifilm is a very large step back even behind the old M5! Using Fuji cameras is just pure fun and enjoyable…it makes taking photos on vacation a lot more exciting to be so connected to the camera turning dials and thinking before you shoot. I’ve even brought the X-100V into the pits at the past two races I worked and really loved it’s size/weight/image quality.Great post...well-written with your detailed impressions, the impressions of a working photographer with hands-on experience that I sense is worth trusting (no snark).
Elsewhere here you mentioned swapping your M gear for Fuji...which Ms did you own...which lenses...and you are (and remain) satisfied with the switch?
Also, I would really like to see the text of the review (XF27mm f/2.8 ?) you wrote that a moderator at DPR found objectionable.
And the DPR response, as well.
I tend not to lean conspiratorial about these things (for personal reasons relating to two+ decades of my own internet-related webmaster experience) and also, on a site like DPR, I sort of 'want to believe' what I'm reading.
I have no reason not to believe what you posted, though, and the real world is a tough, tough place at times. I guess I'd rather not know how hot dogs are made!
=====
Perhaps tangentially related:
Most but not all of those reading this board probably live in areas of the world where professional sports are a big deal.
Here in the United States, a number of sports teams have significant (and in some cases controlling) ownership of the television networks that televise their games.
A couple or three years ago, the Chicago Cubs major league baseball team started their own network: Marquee.
No more than a month ago, Marquee started up a new show: "The Reporters".
It turns out that Marquee broadcasts 24 hours a day...and is desperate for programming in addition to the live Cubs games.
The following passage is taken from the Chicago Tribune (link at the end):
=====
But some wondered how much candor reporters could exercise on Cubs-related topics while on a station run by the Cubs and Sinclair. Would a reporter be allowed to criticize the spending of Chairman Tom Ricketts? Could anyone say manager David Ross was an issue? Would the Cubs run interference to make sure top executives weren’t ripped?
One of those questions was answered Sunday. No, the network would not let a reporter criticize upper management — specifically Hoyer. [added for context: the team's General Manager and President]
Sunday’s show featured three veteran reporters: WSCR-AM 670′s David Haugh, the Chicago Sun-Times’ Maddie Lee and former sports anchor Peggy Kusinski. They were joined by WGN-AM 720 personality Bob Sirott, who was the moderator.
Sources said a segment on the Cubs’ unknown trade-deadline plans was going smoothly until Haugh, a former Tribune columnist, and Kusinski, who has a weekly show on WMVP-AM 1000, discussed the rebuild.
Haugh said Hoyer’s transparency was “lacking,” comparing it unfavorably with the job former President Theo Epstein did in explaining his game plan. Haugh wondered aloud if Hoyer was “tethered to reality” and asked for some clarity from the Cubs president. Kusinski agreed and called for “honesty.”
“That was the wrong term,” Kusinski told the Tribune.
The taping was abruptly halted shortly thereafter for what the reporters were told was a technical difficulty. They were then informed they would have to start the segment all over.
Before they began taping again, the reporters were told not to mention the “transparency” angle in the new segment.
“They kept saying, ‘Stick to what Jed [Hoyer] said (during a group interview last week),’” Kusinski said.
They avoided the subject and the original segment was edited out when the show aired Sunday morning.
Column: Criticize the Chicago Cubs? Not on Marquee Sports Network’s ‘The Reporters’ show.
No, Marquee Sports Network would not let a reporter criticize Chicago Cubs upper management — specifically Jed Hoyer.
=====
The resolution of this problem for Marquee is that the show is now being aired 'live'...and Cubs management has stated publicly that there will be no interference from team executives on the program.
What you have described, LSXPhotog (your posting privileges were revoked?) really makes me wonder. I feel like I have a discerning eye but how can I discern what I am not allowed to see?
My oh my...and I hope this makes sense.
As for the thread, it was deleted by the moderator. (I may have taken a screenshot, but I’m not sure where - I just looked.) But I can show you all the dialogue between me and the shithead moderator that was clearly on a power trip. I can then show you the email I sent to DPReview pleading my case and the email I got BACK from DPReview where they said their moderator was not in the right and that they would be speaking with them about it. Haha
Basically, you have a gear list on DPReview. I just sold the XF27mm f/2.7 lens and moved the lens from “Own” to “Owned” and left a short little 3 start review. I was completely unaware that this isn’t just a review like you see on B&H or Amazon…no, it’s an entire thread in their Fujifilm forum. So, unbenounced to me, there is a thread posted that has 3 pages in less than 24 hours. Comments like “It’s not overrated, it’s sharp!” Or “How can you not like this lens, it’s a pancake, it can’t be perfect.” Apparently if you’re a Fuji owner you can only have a hive mind thought on every lens or camera. If you speak poorly about something in your opinion, you are digitally tarred and feathered. Haha
Well, because I wasn’t there nurturing the comments section making replies, the moderator had already suspended my posting privileges when I returned - my comments had to be reviewed by moderators before they could be made public. I also have an incredibly arrogant private message from the moderator explaining to me etiquette for using their forum and how to properly review a lens - yes, seriously. I clarified my statements with him privately then made a post about it. It was at this time that I realized my posting privileges were suspended. My next post I wanted everyone to know what just happened - so I broke down exactly what I just said privately and that in less than 24 hours this guy’s immediate response was to suspended me all because I left a 3-start review on a lens he likes and wasn’t there to explain myself all day.
Moments later, I get an email informing me that I was permanently banned from DPReview. I protested it immediately with another employee and was reinstated in less than 12 hours. The whole ordeal took roughly 48 hours and I made 3 posts total. They admitted he was wrong and they would be speaking to him about it. The guy was on a power trip.
I’m not sure this was a conspiracy of them not wanting to say anything negative about a product on their site - that’s a little too “tin foil hat” for me. But this was a stupid Fujifilm fanboy with too much power that he flexed on me. Fuji is a weird camera system…it’s hard to define why there is so much passion behind their cameras and lenses…but I can tell you that I shoot with the X-T4 and XF70-300mm lens and I feel like it’s 1985 and I’m working for National Geographic and I’m having a blast using this thing. Meanwhile that lens is losing its mind as you zoom and pulsating focus to pretend it’s parfocal, and the camera body is finding a face in a tree behind a person’s face - and you don’t care. LOL
Upvote
0
I remember that thread (I own Fuji too as well as that particular lens... ha). I was wondering what happened as I couldn't find it the next time I looked. When he deleted the thread, it appears that also deleted your review of the lens. I have a love/hate relationship with that lens. Love that it's a pancake, but hate that it doesn't have the performance of my EF-M 22mm.
Upvote
0
The GPS on my (now sold) Canon 5DS caused it to lock up several times. Consequently, with my 5DMkiv and R5 bodies, I've never been brave enough to turn it on. I only very rarely need location data for my images, other than elevation, and I can get all that from my phone anyway.
Upvote
0
Similar threads
- Contains 1 staff post(s)