Fuji X-T3 released

Grug said:
There was a patent I think I saw posted up, of Fuji camera using CFexpress cards. That could be exciting. If they use CFexpress to enable raw recording internally (or at least a less compressed h264-based 10-bit 4:2:2 codec) that could be grand.

My biggest gripe with the X-T3 is that, having bought it for the internal 10-bit recording, the h265 is so difficult to work with that I basically only record externally anyway - which is a STRESSFUL process when you're dealing with stupid bloody micro-HDMI connectors.

I've already had three $70 Micro HDMI cables broken on shoots. Give them the slightest tap, and it's game-over.
Click to expand...

Use a port lock with an adapter and a regular HDMI cable. Works far better.
 
I'm on my fourth Fujibody right now with the X-T3 and X-T4 might be something to look forward to but my beef with the whole Fuji X system is the lenses. Image quality might turn out okay but I just hate how most of them operate. That zing sound when the focus motor is operating just sounds weird, almost like there's something wrong with the lenses. 18-55 works better but then I find IQ not as good as the 23,35 or 56mm lenses.

The actual X-T3 camera I really like but I doubt a new X-T4 will remedy my issues with Fuji lenses.
 
Grug said:
There was a patent I think I saw posted up, of Fuji camera using CFexpress cards. That could be exciting. If they use CFexpress to enable raw recording internally (or at least a less compressed h264-based 10-bit 4:2:2 codec) that could be grand.

My biggest gripe with the X-T3 is that, having bought it for the internal 10-bit recording, the h265 is so difficult to work with that I basically only record externally anyway - which is a STRESSFUL process when you're dealing with stupid bloody micro-HDMI connectors.

I've already had three $70 Micro HDMI cables broken on shoots. Give them the slightest tap, and it's game-over.
Click to expand...

I transcode the footage. External recorders on such a small camera is a PITA to work with more so than transcoding to ProRes.

To stop the Micro HDMI madness I have my X-T3 in a SmallRig cage with a Micro to Full adapter locked in. So far so good. No broken cables or damaged port.
 
I too use the cable lock on the SmallRig cage but it doesn't work well for me because I am constantly wanting to go from handheld or tripod to gimbal and back. I have the SmallRig cage for the battery grip, it's too tall to work on our gimbal and trying to remove the body from the cage with the cable lock is a time consuming mess. I really need two bodies, one that stays in the cage for HH and tripod and one that stays on the gimbal, that would be ideal.

That alone might be impetus for me to buy an XT-4, one can stay on the gimbal, balanced, tweaked with my favorite XF16mm f/1.4 lens and one stays in the cage with the battery grip, port protector and the XF18-55mm f/2.8-4/0 OIS. That would actually work well.

BTW, our Crane 2 is powering the XT-3 when it's gimbal mounted and it's working really well. Dummy Andy Cine battery cable out to the bottom of the cam, cable goes to plug adapter plugged into the 8.4V DC on the Crane 2. I can even leave the camera power on and when I power the Crane 2 on and off, the camera is powered on and off at the same time, it's great.

Definitely goes through the Crane batteries a lot quicker, but 2-3 sets of them gets you through a 10-12 hour shoot day and it's so much easier to change the Crane 2 batteries than taking the XT-3 body off the gimbal every 20 minutes to change batteries and then have to re-balance it. It has the marks on the plate but even when I try to precisely match the marks on the plates, the camera is NEVER balanced and requires tweaking. I was worried because the DC outlet on the Crane 2 is non-locking, was worried about it falling or being pulled out during recording but hasn't happened, I just tuck and tape the cables so the loop doesn't stick out much and I am careful and so far, so good.
 
Last edited:
Trust me. Cable locks do not do justice for micro HDMI. My original Pocket Cinema Camera failed even with a port lock.
 
Thanks Carlos, will test this later today. Can't use my 56mm 1.2 because of the autofocus issue. Hoping this update fixes it.
 
rbirnbaum said:
Thanks Carlos, will test this later today. Can't use my 56mm 1.2 because of the autofocus issue. Hoping this update fixes it.
Click to expand...

Older lenses like the 56mm and some of the f/1.4s won't be as good as the newer f/2+ lenses. The 56mm may actually be one of the worst for video AF, but probably one of their best pieces of glass overall.
 
What we need to see is a locked off camera on a tripod, with a locked off subject, shallow DOF, with constant, none changing lighting. If you can't put the AF-C box on the subject and just let the camera roll and have the focusing stay unactivated and rock solid in this situation, then the fix isn't effective, it's that simple.

We ran the X-T3 on a shoot over the weekend as a fairly wide alternate angle on tripod. Subjects were moving around a little but not much and the footage is almost unusable. Probably should have cranked the ISO and stopped down the lens to f/6.3 or 7.1
and just turned off AF. This shoot, of course wasn't with the new 3.20 FW. I'm still going to wait a few days before I take the leap although I am starting to see that I don't have much to lose unless the new AF is actually worse than the 3.01?
 
Last edited:
NorBro said:
Peter Gregg has one of the best environments possible to test how AF performs as you can focus on the growing and shrinking bokeh balls, but he used one of the worst lenses for video AF. A minor improvement here, but really need to see a 23-35-50mm f/2 test to know more.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gbFl0RDyzgU&t=150s
Click to expand...

According to the specs, he's using a Sony lens? With the Fringer? I don't even know how you put a Sony lens on an X-T3?
This performance looks the same as I am getting with the FW 3.01 using XF lenses. I get slightly worse AF performace with the Fringer Pro and Canon lenses.
He also used the face detection, who uses the face detection for video? I don't even do that on the C200 very much. Most pros are going to be using AF-C.
Not a very conclusive sample unfortunately.
 
puredrifting said:
According to the specs, he's using a Sony lens? With the Fringer? I don't even know how you put a Sony lens on an X-T3?
This performance looks the same as I am getting with the FW 3.01 using XF lenses. I get slightly worse AF performace with the Fringer Pro and Canon lenses.
He also used the face detection, who uses the face detection for video? I don't even do that on the C200 very much. Most pros are going to be using AF-C.
Not a very conclusive sample unfortunately.
Click to expand...

If you watch the video, he says it was the 35mm f/1.4 around 40 seconds.

The description is most likely a copy/paste typo as the link also points to the Fujifilm 35mm.

Also, EVERYONE uses face-detection with good AF cameras. AF-C stands for continuous AF, and face-tracking is just a setting. But no pros are going to use anything else for a simple test like above if you're looking to track a face.

You gotta brush up on your auto-focus, haha.

The C200 has terrible face-detection, but Sony's new cameras and some of the Canon DSLRs are practically flawless. The newer cameras are smart enough to stop looking for a face (or pause) when it leaves the frame or if the person turns around.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top