Fuji X-T3 released

Am I right in thinking you can now get the same quality 4K 10 bit 4:2:2 in Prores from the X-T30 as from the X-T3 via HDMI into something like Ninja V?
 
If same quality = same numbers, then yes.

But 4K 10-bit 4:2:2 from a Sony FS7 may not look the same like 4K 10-bit 4:2:2 from a FS5.

Much more to an image and quality than marketing text.
 
Sam Scoggins said:
Am I right in thinking you can now get the same quality 4K 10 bit 4:2:2 in Prores from the X-T30 as from the X-T3 via HDMI into something like Ninja V?
Click to expand...

Since X-T3 and X-T30 shares the exact same sensor and processor, the images will match perfectly in terms of quality and look.
 
Finster said:
SLR Magic first announced these lenses for the Sony E-Mount at NAB 2018, but it looks like they're coming out with MFT & X-Mount versions ...

SLR Magic MicroPrime Cine 25mm T1.5 Lens

SLR Magic MicroPrime Cine 50mm T1.2 Lens

I mentioned this over on bmcuser, but since the P4K is so slow to ship, I might invest in the XT3 and a few SLR Magic Cine lenses instead!
Click to expand...

But this is like using any other manual lens which is not fuji right? You lose CA correction and all the goods. So same as using PL with adapter.
 
SJX said:
But this is like using any other manual lens which is not fuji right? You lose CA correction and all the goods. So same as using PL with adapter.
Click to expand...


I would be careful about these notions of CA correction, etc. I have found that while they work with photos because of a still image's much greater resolution, they tend to add a digital edge to lower resolution video (even 4k). This was one of the major distinctions I made between the MKX Zoom lenses and the Fuji XF photo glass when shooting video. Don't get me wrong, I think the AF tracking is really quite good and often helpful for shooting video in the XF line and that those lenses actually are out-resolving much of my Canon and Nikon glass, but I do see a difference compared with purpose built cinema lenses (I own a PL adapter for my X-T3's as well) in terms of the way subjects are rendered against a background. There is something gentler with an image that has not been auto corrected. I suspect that some kind of sharpening is being added with the auto correction of certain lenses.
 
Last edited:
yoclay said:
I would be careful about these notions of CA correction, etc. I have found that while they work with photos because of a still image's much greater resolution, they tend to add a digital edge to lower resolution video (even 4k). This was one of the major distinctions I made between the MKX Zoom lenses and the Fuji XF photo glass when shooting video. Don't get me wrong, I think the AF tracking is really quite good and often helpful for shooting video in the XF line and that those lenses actually are out-resolving much of my Canon and Nikon glass, but I do see a difference compared with purpose built cinema lenses (I own a PL adapter for my X-T3's as well) in terms of the way subjects are rendered against a background. There is something gentler with an image that has not been auto corrected. I suspect that some kind of sharpening is being added with the auto correction of certain lenses.
Click to expand...

Ok. But if you need AF I think you must buy fuji lenses or?
 
SJX said:
Ok. But if you need AF I think you must buy fuji lenses or?
Click to expand...

Not true, you buy a Fringer adapter and all of the EF glass AF works just fine. I'm shooting both XF glass and my Canon glass on my X-T3 and the Canon glass looks great.
 
puredrifting said:
Not true, you buy a Fringer adapter and all of the EF glass AF works just fine. I'm shooting both XF glass and my Canon glass on my X-T3 and the Canon glass looks great.
Click to expand...

And the AF works as well as the fuji lenses? Good enough to follow person, car etc?
 
yoclay said:
I would be careful about these notions of CA correction, etc. I have found that while they work with photos because of a still image's much greater resolution, they tend to add a digital edge to lower resolution video (even 4k). This was one of the major distinctions I made between the MKX Zoom lenses and the Fuji XF photo glass when shooting video. Don't get me wrong, I think the AF tracking is really quite good and often helpful for shooting video in the XF line and that those lenses actually are out-resolving much of my Canon and Nikon glass, but I do see a difference compared with purpose built cinema lenses (I own a PL adapter for my X-T3's as well) in terms of the way subjects are rendered against a background. There is something gentler with an image that has not been auto corrected. I suspect that some kind of sharpening is being added with the auto correction of certain lenses.
Click to expand...

Yoclay, I agree something is definitely taking place in regards to the mix zoom lenses that I see as well. It stemlike the images looks heavier and and subjects still look really sharp with texture and not the more edge enhanced sharpness look I see more from the xf photo lenses. I never new what this major difference was but Now your explaining it.
 
reem12 said:
Puredrifting, do you have any sample work of the canon glass adapted to the fuji?
Click to expand...

Nothing is posted because all three projects I have shot with it on are under NDA. I might be able to post a frame grab but that's not the same as seeing it in action.
 
SJX said:
And the AF works as well as the fuji lenses? Good enough to follow person, car etc?
Click to expand...

It's going to vary with the Canon lens. Even on Canon, the focus is highly variable. My EF 70-200mm f/2.8 IS II focuses a hell of a lot better than the EF S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS for instance.
But generally, I don't see a lot of difference with AF performance between my XF and EF lenses. Just like Canon's DAF, the Fujifilm's AF works better when well lit and hunts in low light or underexposed areas. I shot just a little bit with the X-T3 on gimbal this morning a political rally and one of the speakers was under a pop up but all around her was nuclear day light, so I couldn't really expose her brightly as all of the BG around her would have blown out. Both my C200 and the X-T3 had focusing issues so I resorted back to manual focus for a few shots.
 
scorsesefan said:
Fuji recommends this ext usb-c battery for the x-t3: https://bhpho.to/2SXCOa4 Will any usb-c battery that delivers 5v work? Also, any mounting solutions on a rig for these types of batteries?
Click to expand...

Not all power solutions are created equal, unfortunately, so while they'll all "work" to some degree it depends on your definition of "work." This is a really detailed and helpful explanation of what the various batteries and banks will do:

https://domvarney.com/2018/11/22/powering-the-fuji-x-t3/
 
scorsesefan said:
Fuji recommends this ext usb-c battery for the x-t3: https://bhpho.to/2SXCOa4 Will any usb-c battery that delivers 5v work? Also, any mounting solutions on a rig for these types of batteries?

Or would something like this work? https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1398800-REG/pom_gear_p2g_5032_bk_pom_gear_power2go_10.html
Click to expand...

I agree with the recommendation of the Anker. There are voltage considerations as well as amperage. It's similar to running the Sound Devices Mix Pre 3, you need to go with what the manufacturer recommends. Not sure why you want to deal with an extra battery that has to be transported and hung/rigged? I bought a battery Fuji grip for shooting interviews, I want to have fewer cables and extra things laying around when shooting. It gives over 2 hours of record time. Also, keep in mind, you can also plug in AC with the battery pack so if you are shooting events from a single location or interviews, just go off of AC?
 
puredrifting said:
I agree with the recommendation of the Anker. There are voltage considerations as well as amperage. It's similar to running the Sound Devices Mix Pre 3, you need to go with what the manufacturer recommends. Not sure why you want to deal with an extra battery that has to be transported and hung/rigged? I bought a battery Fuji grip for shooting interviews, I want to have fewer cables and extra things laying around when shooting. It gives over 2 hours of record time. Also, keep in mind, you can also plug in AC with the battery pack so if you are shooting events from a single location or interviews, just go off of AC?
Click to expand...

Thanks, Puredrifting. Your responses are always constructive. I think I'll go with the Anker.
 
Last edited:
puredrifting said:
It's going to vary with the Canon lens. Even on Canon, the focus is highly variable. My EF 70-200mm f/2.8 IS II focuses a hell of a lot better than the EF S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS for instance.
But generally, I don't see a lot of difference with AF performance between my XF and EF lenses. Just like Canon's DAF, the Fujifilm's AF works better when well lit and hunts in low light or underexposed areas. I shot just a little bit with the X-T3 on gimbal this morning a political rally and one of the speakers was under a pop up but all around her was nuclear day light, so I couldn't really expose her brightly as all of the BG around her would have blown out. Both my C200 and the X-T3 had focusing issues so I resorted back to manual focus for a few shots.
Click to expand...

Ok. Good to know Canon is a possibility then.

By the way, how do the cheaper fuji lenses compare to the more expensive? For example this:

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1021608-REG/fujifilm_16412188_xf_10_24mm_f_4_r.html?sts=pi

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1110879-REG/fujifilm_xf_16_55mm_f_2_8_r.html?sts=pi

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1080892-REG/fujifilm_16443060_xf_50_140mm_f_2_8_r.html?sts=pi


compared to this:

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1387600-REG/fujifilm_16565789_xc_15_45mm_f_3_5_5_6_ois.html

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1113032-REG/fujifilm_xc_50_230mm_f_4_5_6_7_ois.html


Is the speed of the lens the main difference and reason for higher price? Or the quality and AF on the cheaper ones is bad?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top