Fujirumors is reporting,based on a tip from an anonymous source, that the X-H2 will be 8K ready, meaning that it will yield a sensor of at lest 36MP.Nonetheless, as of yet, it seems to be a "lower-tier" rumor in terms of credibility, so take this with a BIG grain of salt.

yayatosorus wrote:Fujirumors is reporting,based on a tip from an anonymous source, that the X-H2 will be 8K ready, meaning that it will yield a sensor of at lest 36MP.How do you get the 36 megapixel figure? I get 33 for 16:9 video, and 39 for a 3:2 APS-C sensor with that pixel width:8k video at 16:9 aspect ratio, twice the resolution of 4K (3840*2160) in both directions: 7680 * 4320 = 33.2 million.APS-C sensor at 3:2 ratio, width the same 7690 pixel width: 7680 * (7680 * 2/3) = 39.3 million.Yours is right in between. Could you explain where you get it from and in that case how my numbers are wrong?Nonetheless, as of yet, it seems to be a "lower-tier" rumor in terms of credibility, so take this with a BIG grain of salt.Personally I have zero interest in 8K and hope they don't spend too much resources on it that could be used at something else, like shaving off some weight, size and cost. Main reason against it is the obscene amount of data which in 99% of cases you can't tell apart from 4k anyway.On the positives... Being 8K capable usually says good things about the 4k performance. We might see 4k 120Hz which looks insane. Just please please pleaseDON'T MAKE SLOW MOTION THE ONLY OPTION AT 120Hz!!! I absolutely hate that the only way to shoot 120Hz video is to manually scale every clip back up to 120Hz in post, and to get audio have to capture and sync it with a separate device.I'm in favor of the sensor being in the 40 megapixels for stills. In 90% of practical use and lens-f/stop combinations there is some other bottleneck that makes 24MP just as good, but higher pixel density opens up more reach to crop with the sharpest lenses and good conditions at f/4-5.6. XF90mm or XF80mm for wildlife (except birds), anyone?

norjens wrote:yayatosorus wrote:Fujirumors is reporting,based on a tip from an anonymous source, that the X-H2 will be 8K ready, meaning that it will yield a sensor of at lest 36MP.How do you get the 36 megapixel figure? I get 33 for 16:9 video, and 39 for a 3:2 APS-C sensor with that pixel width:8k video at 16:9 aspect ratio, twice the resolution of 4K (3840*2160) in both directions: 7680 * 4320 = 33.2 million.APS-C sensor at 3:2 ratio, width the same 7690 pixel width: 7680 * (7680 * 2/3) = 39.3 million.Yours is right in between. Could you explain where you get it from and in that case how my numbers are wrong?Nonetheless, as of yet, it seems to be a "lower-tier" rumor in terms of credibility, so take this with a BIG grain of salt.Personally I have zero interest in 8K and hope they don't spend too much resources on it that could be used at something else, like shaving off some weight, size and cost. Main reason against it is the obscene amount of data which in 99% of cases you can't tell apart from 4k anyway.If it is 8K they are not going to shave off weight since 8K will need a bigger heat sink.On the positives... Being 8K capable usually says good things about the 4k performance. We might see 4k 120Hz which looks insane. Just please please pleaseDON'T MAKE SLOW MOTION THE ONLY OPTION AT 120Hz!!! I absolutely hate that the only way to shoot 120Hz video is to manually scale every clip back up to 120Hz in post, and to get audio have to capture and sync it with a separate device.I'm in favor of the sensor being in the 40 megapixels for stills. In 90% of practical use and lens-f/stop combinations there is some other bottleneck that makes 24MP just as good, but higher pixel density opens up more reach to crop with the sharpest lenses and good conditions at f/4-5.6. XF90mm or XF80mm for wildlife (except birds), anyone?

yayatosorus wrote:Fujirumors is reporting,based on a tip from an anonymous source, that the X-H2 will be 8K ready, meaning that it will yield a sensor of at lest 36MP.Nonetheless, as of yet, it seems to be a "lower-tier" rumor in terms of credibility, so take this with a BIG grain of salt.Makes sense. They owe it to the XH line to make it the first Xtrans 5 camera and have mega video specs. Should be the camera of the year next year as long as they get the video specs right, like suitable codec for 8K.The XT5 might be too small for 8K, so the XH should become the flagship it should have been the first time around. A proper competitor to Sonys A7 series. It's been an amazing bargain for people who didn't need Xtrans 4 specs, because Fuji made a big mistake with it's timing. If it does 8K right count me in.There was a whole hoohaaa about 4K and H.265 editing which people and companies found a way around. They should do the same for 8K. Might be a reason Apple changed their processors, which I think (?) made all developers have to remake their apps.

Truman Prevatt wrote:norjens wrote:[snipped]Personally I have zero interest in 8K andhope they don't spend too much resources on it that could be used atsomething else, likeshaving off some weight, size and cost.If it is 8K they are not going to shave off weight since 8K will need a bigger heat sink.Hey, I think you misread me. Highlighted above so it's even more clear that I hope they don't add 8k if it means making it more heavy, big or expensive than with 4k.

Street_Photography wrote:yayatosorus wrote:Fujirumors is reporting,based on a tip from an anonymous source, that the X-H2 will be 8K ready, meaning that it will yield a sensor of at lest 36MP.Nonetheless, as of yet, it seems to be a "lower-tier" rumor in terms of credibility, so take this with a BIG grain of salt.Makes sense. They owe it to the XH line to make it the first Xtrans 5 camera and have mega video specs. Should be the camera of the year next year as long as they get the video specs right, like suitable codec for 8K.The X-H1 was Fuji's flagship SLR body for a couple of months.

More to video Would that mean articulated screen (like X-T4) too?Mario

Mczar2u wrote:More to video Would that mean articulated screen (like X-T4) too?MarioProbably since the XH2 is going to be video-centric, but hopefully that means that the X-T5 either gets the X-T3 or X-T100 screen.

DarnGoodPhotos wrote:Mczar2u wrote:More to video Would that mean articulated screen (like X-T4) too?MarioProbably since the XH2 is going to be video-centric, but hopefully that means that the X-T5 either gets the X-T3 or X-T100 screen.Panasonic S1H screen, anyone? As demonstratedhere, it can both flip and tilt up on axis behind the camera. Why choose one when you could have both?

norjens wrote:DarnGoodPhotos wrote:Mczar2u wrote:More to video Would that mean articulated screen (like X-T4) too?MarioProbably since the XH2 is going to be video-centric, but hopefully that means that the X-T5 either gets the X-T3 or X-T100 screen.Panasonic S1H screen, anyone? As demonstratedhere, it can both flip and tilt up on axis behind the camera. Why choose one when you could have both?People like to attribute this kind of screen to Panasonic, but Sony had a similar screen on its SLTs like the A99 back in 2013. Its a bulky design, but that doesnt matter on a larger camera like the X-H2.Not as versatile but the X-T100's screen can both tilt and face the front. I wonder why Fuji ditched the design on the X-T200.

cool LCD were the ones like

norjens wrote:DarnGoodPhotos wrote:Mczar2u wrote:More to video Would that mean articulated screen (like X-T4) too?MarioProbably since the XH2 is going to be video-centric, but hopefully that means that the X-T5 either gets the X-T3 or X-T100 screen.Panasonic S1H screen, anyone? As demonstratedhere, it can both flip and tilt up on axis behind the camera. Why choose one when you could have both?A word, WEIGHT.A hybrid screen comes with a weight penalty, would Fuji be willing to take the risk of going with a heavier camera.

norjens wrote:Truman Prevatt wrote:norjens wrote:[snipped]Personally I have zero interest in 8K andhope they don't spend too much resources on it that could be used atsomething else, likeshaving off some weight, size and cost.If it is 8K they are not going to shave off weight since 8K will need a bigger heat sink.Hey, I think you misread me. Highlighted above so it's even more clear that I hope they don't add 8k if it means making it more heavy, big or expensive than with 4k.Oh I think that "ship has done sailed," as my old Grandpappy used to say. The good news is we may see more differentiation in a camera designed for video but can do stills to the XT line so they might be able to cut some weight off the XT.  After all there is some advantage of APSC for video with a stacked faster read time sensor to FF.  It would only make sense for Fuji to try to leverage that.  Although I am sure that the gear head spec hound mafia out there will be demanding everything in the XH2 to be in the XT5.Only time will tell.

holashobby wrote:norjens wrote:DarnGoodPhotos wrote:Mczar2u wrote:More to video Would that mean articulated screen (like X-T4) too?MarioProbably since the XH2 is going to be video-centric, but hopefully that means that the X-T5 either gets the X-T3 or X-T100 screen.Panasonic S1H screen, anyone? As demonstratedhere, it can both flip and tilt up on axis behind the camera. Why choose one when you could have both?A word, WEIGHT.A hybrid screen comes with a weight penalty, would Fuji be willing to take the risk of going with a heavier camera.Fuji is fine with added weight when its due to a feature, think IBIS on the X-T4; besides, the X-H# is Fujis bigger and heavier camera.

DarnGoodPhotos wrote:holashobby wrote:norjens wrote:DarnGoodPhotos wrote:Mczar2u wrote:More to video Would that mean articulated screen (like X-T4) too?MarioProbably since the XH2 is going to be video-centric, but hopefully that means that the X-T5 either gets the X-T3 or X-T100 screen.Panasonic S1H screen, anyone? As demonstratedhere, it can both flip and tilt up on axis behind the camera. Why choose one when you could have both?A word, WEIGHT.A hybrid screen comes with a weight penalty, would Fuji be willing to take the risk of going with a heavier camera.Fuji is fine with added weight when its due to a feature, think IBIS on the X-T4; besides, the X-H# is Fujis bigger and heavier camera.Where the cost-benefits ratio pans out of course, that doesn't seem to be the case here, an FAS does it all with less weight albeit less conveniently, a point implicitly acknowledged by the competition following their s5 and A7c releases. Looking at the market, APS-C cameras have less flexibility with weight, as I see it, the x-h# needs to be quite a bit lighter than the R6 and s5, otherwise, I foresee a lot of negative publicity.

As a videocentric Fuji user 8k would be cool to see but I'm not buying another Fuji body until they proven they can fix the AF algorithm for this current generation of cameras. If they are reliant on additional processing power to improve CAF than the camera is likely just going to have over heating issues with 8k.

Fuji Maine wrote:As a videocentric Fuji user 8k would be cool to see but I'm not buying another Fuji body until they proven they can fix the AF algorithm for this current generation of cameras. If they are reliant on additional processing power to improve CAF than the camera is likely just going to have over heating issues with 8k.The faster read rate the better your AF should be.  So if they go with the Sony stacked sensor process, they should be able to significantly improve AF and get AF performance not achievable on the current sensor family.  Of course it also depends on processor.  Hopefully Fuji takes a hard look at the Snapdragon processor which is not only kick butt but is built in a 7 nm process so is very power efficient which they will need for 8K.