Speed vs resolution for small bird photography X-H2 vs X-H2s

[Bisonbison]

Some months ago I had asked you all about how game changing you thought bird-eye AF was. Now, I’ve narrowed my choices down to two cameras that both offer bird eye AF (both Fujifilm).
The X-H2s a stacked sensor 26MP apsc body that can shoot upto 40fps in silent mode with AF and AE
OR
The X-H2 with a non-stacked BSI 40MP apsc sensor with slower sensor scan rate, but 15fps mechanical and 20fps electronic (with a 1.29x crop)

I’d plan to use the camera with a Fuji 150-600mm f5.6-8 lens (>900mm FF equivalent).

Due to my budget, I’m only considering these two options for now. While Fuji’s implementation of subject detect AF is in its first generation, the system as a whole suits my needs.

I am thinking of these options sort of like the choice between an A9 vs an A7Riv.
BIF is not my primary/only focus. If you had to pick one of those bodies for songbird photography, which would you choose?

 

[Wrogu]

I am quite fascinated with new fujifilm cameras. Mainly due to the kit you can make and lens choice. No way I will switch, but if I were making my choice now Fuji would be high on the list. A fun fact - 150-600 is not that slow, it is just as slow as canon 150-600 @500 (7.1). It is also quite light. Add that 200f2 in the future and you have a serious wildlife kit with a very very fast prime lens and super long telehoto. 200f2 has some great discounts from time to time.

I would ask myslef if I want to shoot fast targets or slower ones. If action is on the list go with xh2s. Stack sensors are seroiusly awesome. Silent shooting no blackouts are real gamechangers. 26 MPX is still plenty. 40 MPX is really tempting tho. Btw stacked sensor has probably more reliable AF as it is most likely doing more AF sensor readouts per second.

In that budget I would also consider Sony and their a7iv with 200-600 as an alternative to xh2. There are few compact sony lenses if it is what you value.

Btw this is what you may expect. Seems like fuji is still not there yet and needs some tweaking. But surely it is still capable!

 

[agrumpyoldsod]

Fujifilm cameras are on a par with all the other top brands -- they do a great job -- and given the crop sensor they do so in a small package.
The trick - is to put yourself in a place where there are great opportunities to shoot - safely and without disturbing the subjects. Irrespective of what system you are using.

I have shot with crop sensor cameras and with full frame -- I like being able to select between full-frame and cropped image areas while shooting - particularly of small subjects -- it makes it easier for the camera to gain focus, lock on and track. BUT - I do not only shot small birds and I like to shoot wildlife in its environment. Hence why I carry cameras that do both.

I know some older folk and ladies luv the small form factor of these cameras and have no need to go above 24mp - and to be truthful nor do many of us either. SO why buy a 40+MP body that has a lower fps and worse low light performance? Well for studio work and landscapes and ...... BUT...

Fujifilm cameras have pushed the limit on "ramming" in more and more pixels on to comparatively small sensors - and the X-H2 with its 40.2 Effective MP on a 23.5x15.6 has an approximate Pixel Pitch of 3.04 microns. This is the smallest of any production Mirrorless Interchangeable Lens Camera and is the equivalent to over 90mp on a full-frame body, As a result this camera will suffer from severe diffraction at far wider apertures than any other production camera - this offsets the benefit of the additional sensor resolution AND really forces users to utilise very expensive glass with wide apertures and to shoot wide open. [DLA=f/5.3 - when the effects of diffraction become visible. VS f/8 for a 45mp ff body].
The X-H2S, with its 26.1mp sensor can both shoot at a higher fps and has less challenges when it comes to diffraction. The 3.77 micron pixel pitch allows each pixel the opportunity to access more light and as a result it should "do better"(be less noisy) in low light than the higher resolution X-H2.

FujiFilm has a wide range of lenses and some long lenses too - but the XF150-600 f/5.6-8.0 R LM OIS WR would need to be used with care at max focal length on the X-H2 and image quality would drop significantly when this lens is used with a XF1.4TC WR and certainly with the XF2X TC WR. I would be tempted to only buy the XF100-400 f/4.5-5.6R LM OIS WR for wildlife shooting and also buy the XF1.4TC.

The other difference between the X-H2 and X-H2S is the design of the sensor -- not-stacked -vs- stacked -- well others can and have shouted about this.

 

[Nimi]

Fujis are great and have been my backup system since the XT1. I have an XT4 right now sitting next to my Z9. I am also considering upgrading to one of the XH2 bodies and because I spend at least half my time on video, most likely the 40mp (8k) model.

One very attractive feature in at least the s version is the inclusion of the frame.io system next year. C2C (camera to cloud) will change photography and videography as we know it and Fuji (and Red) are the first to implement it.

With all that said, I am waiting for more data (reputable reviewes) on the autofocus and tracking. On the XT4 it is atrocious. Not much of a bird photographer but I shoot action sports and automotive and the XT4 was never great at it which is why it's been just a backup camera to me. Other than that, it's a great system with great lenses producing great files. Some of their lenses are the best I've used.

 

[PhilcTx]

I've had the Fuji XT-1, XT-2, and now the XT-4. Also have had Canon, Nikon, and now a Sony A7IV.

Along with the mirrorless APS-C reduced weight and smaller form-factor the main thing that motivated me to buy into Fuji was their wonderful color science. With Fujifilm's history in film they bring a lot to the table. To me there's something special about Fuji image colors that is just a little different and unique.

 

[Bisonbison]

Thank you all for your replies so far. I appreciate the information you have given me to work with specifically relating to the two cameras I’m considering.

What about the more general question? Would you recommend speed or resolution for photographing small birds (not in flight)? I am also looking for feedback on that specific use case. Ideally both would be the best option like a Sony A1 or Nikon Z9. But outside of those two models, one would have to compromise. What would you give more importance to, say for photographing warblers?

 

[Nimi]

Thank you all for your replies so far. I appreciate the information you have given me to work with specifically relating to the two cameras I’m considering.

What about the more general question? Would you recommend speed or resolution for photographing small birds (not in flight)? I am also looking for feedback on that specific use case. Ideally both would be the best option like a Sony A1 or Nikon Z9. But outside of those two models, one would have to compromise. What would you give more importance to, say for photographing warblers?

If they aren't moving, I'd vote for resolution hands down. In flight, I'd first make sure Fuji stepped up their AF.

 

[Tom Reynolds]

My understanding is that the Fuji AF speed is not on par with other flagship cameras (Nikon, Sony, Canon, OM Systems) so that argues for more megapixels since you will be largely shooting perched birds. On the other hand, I shoot a 20mp m43 camera and 20MP is just fine. My previous camera, a D-500 was 20mp was also just fine as a D-850 in DX mode.

Tough decision but I would go with the stacked sensor. Software updates may fix AF focus speed somewhat.

 

[Alistair]

I believe that 26mp crop is roughly the same pixel density as 45mp FF ? That is enough for me, diffraction kicking in around F8. With 40+mp on a crop sensor you probably would be limited to F5.6 before diffraction makes the extra pixels give diminishing returns.
And then you have stacked vs non stacked and the former has huge advantages for many shooting scenarios.
26mp stacked all the way for me!

 

[Bisonbison]

Thank you all for your comments. I think I should put this choice aside and consider other options as well. I’ll let you know what I’ve decided. Thanks!

 

[Calson]

I would consider the amount of noise and ISO limitations. With smaller sensors a high pixel count is a negative in terms of avoiding excessive noise with a high ISO. I would expect less noise from the 26MP camera.

 

[Bisonbison]

I haven’t used a FF sensor nor have I used a high pixel density sensor like the X-H2. So outside of a 26MP apsc sensor, it’s all going to be new territory for me, wrt to noise etc. The main reason I have stuck with a crop sensor is for reach for bird photography.

Would a FF option be something I should consider? I worry about loss of reach as I can’t afford the big white primes. So will be limited to 100/200 to 500/600 zooms.

 

[Tom Reynolds]

I would consider two non-Fuji rigs for small bird photography.

1-Canon R7 with a 100-500 f/7.1 zoom. This is a 32.5 mp 1.6 crop that gives 800mm ff equ. reach.
2-OM Systems OM-1 with a 100-400 zoom. This is a 20mp sensor with a 2.0 crop factor, also an 800mm equ. reach.

Guess what? Same decision matrix. The OM-1 is a stacked sensor with blazing fast AF and subject ID. The R7 is not a stacked sensor but still performs quite well with Canon's well-known AF and subject ID capabilities.

In my opinion both would be better for small birds than either Fuji.

Both are quite light. In particular the OM-1/100-400 combo weighs about 4.5# and is very compact as the lens is designed for a m43 sensor. The R7/100-500 weighs about 5# and is less compact because the lens is a very popular FF lens. A lighter, less expensive Canon solution is a R7/100-400+ a 1.4TC but I am not as familiar with its performance.

Regards,

Tom

You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.

 

[Nimi]

I haven’t used a FF sensor nor have I used a high pixel density sensor like the X-H2. So outside of a 26MP apsc sensor, it’s all going to be new territory for me, wrt to noise etc. The main reason I have stuck with a crop sensor is for reach for bird photography.

Would a FF option be something I should consider? I worry about loss of reach as I can’t afford the big white primes. So will be limited to 100/200 to 500/600 zooms.

Don't let us dissuade you from Fuji. They are very good cameras, capable of 90% of what all other top-tier cameras. And if you can muster the funds for their only white lens (200/2), 95%.

You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.

 

[Bisonbison]

But the Fuji white lens is 200mm f2, short for small birds. I wouldn’t even have considered it an option if not for the new 150-600mm lens, which is in the same ball park as Canon’s 100-500mm aperture-wise.

 

[abc123brian]

just something to consider when looking at your original general question, the X-H2 is not really slow, especially for the resolution. The stacked sensors are great and have a lot of benefits, but you can see the new AF algorithms all brands are using can perform well even on slow cameras and sensors. It certainly makes decision making difficult. Add to that no perfect system seems to exist in the midrange (or even the upper range). Fuji has updated their AF, finally have a long lens available, but the lens has a small aperture. Similar situation for Canon, though Canon has fast lenses if you can spend the money. Sony has the most interesting budget lens, the 200-600mm, but the midrange bodies are relatively slow though they do have good AF. Nikon, well hopefully we won’t have to wait too long for them to release some new products. The 100-400mm is great, but a bit short for small birds. M4/3 cameras have some interesting features, but I was never really happy with the image quality. I will admit my experience is not with the newer technology, but I also find it difficult to spend the money for the higher end M4/3 gear which is not cheap.

I think if I were to choose between resolution or stacked sensor (Speed) for stationary birds, I’d choose resolution. Again, the X-H2 gives you resolution and is fairly quick so could be a nice option.

 

[Bisonbison]

@abc123brian i agree completely. I’m firmly in the mid-range (no A1, z9 or R3).
Most attainable options body wise are Canon R7, which I am not keen on due to the rolling shutter in electronic and relatively loud mechanical. Besides I have zero canon equipment.
The two Fujis I am thinking about here (the spouse uses and likes Fuji colors), and the OM-1, for which @Tom Reynolds makes an excellent case above.
I agree the lens choices are harder outside of the relatively slow zooms.
Perhaps I need to bite the bullet and go for an OM-1 and a couple of lenses. I’ve used an EM-1 ii and a G9 in the past and been OK with the output. I actually really liked the G9 and 100-400mm ergonomics, but got frustrated with the contrast detect AF inconsistencies.
By all accounts, the OM-1 is a new sensor and has very positive reviews. (My only reservations about it have to do with OM being held by a private equity firm). That’s not a photographic decision but a reflection of my appetite for risk. So, i should try an OM-1 and see how it goes. It’s good on the pixels per duck (due to its size) as well as speed (due to stacked sensor).
I’ve already played around with the X-H2s though not with avian subjects.
I shall get back to this thread, hopefully in a week or so to update you on my thoughts on the OM-1.

 

[Nimi]

@abc123brian i agree completely. I’m firmly in the mid-range (no A1, z9 or R3).
Most attainable options body wise are Canon R7, which I am not keen on due to the rolling shutter in electronic and relatively loud mechanical. Besides I have zero canon equipment.
The two Fujis I am thinking about here (the spouse uses and likes Fuji colors), and the OM-1, for which @Tom Reynolds makes an excellent case above.
I agree the lens choices are harder outside of the relatively slow zooms.
Perhaps I need to bite the bullet and go for an OM-1 and a couple of lenses. I’ve used an EM-1 ii and a G9 in the past and been OK with the output. I actually really liked the G9 and 100-400mm ergonomics, but got frustrated with the contrast detect AF inconsistencies.
By all accounts, the OM-1 is a new sensor and has very positive reviews. (My only reservations about it have to do with OM being held by a private equity firm). That’s not a photographic decision but a reflection of my appetite for risk. So, i should try an OM-1 and see how it goes. It’s good on the pixels per duck (due to its size) as well as speed (due to stacked sensor).
I’ve already played around with the X-H2s though not with avian subjects.
I shall get back to this thread, hopefully in a week or so to update you on my thoughts on the OM-1.

OM may or may not be a viable company, discussed elsewhere here. It was discarded by Olympus after losing money for many years and picked up by a financial investor going into a down market. "Catching a fallong knife" analogy comes to mind. That would be my greatest concern about getting into the ecosystem.

 

[Bisonbison]

OM may or may not be a viable company, discussed elsewhere here. It was discarded by Olympus after losing money for many years and picked up by a financial investor going into a down market. "Catching a fallong knife" analogy comes to mind. That would be my greatest concern about getting into the ecosystem.

@Nimi
After ruling out the R7, if my options are between two manufacturers - one of them improving their gen 1 subject detect AF firmware over time and the other’s financial backer cashing out at some point of time. I think there are precedents for both of these things.
While I find the products of the latter to be very good, my aversion toward ‘falling knives’ would lead me to choosing the former. Sigh, deeper sigh.

 

[Tom Reynolds]

Nah! Bad assumptions.

OM Systems has a niche that nobody is competing in. Olympus got rid of the division because it was a bit player in the market, not because they couldn't make money with it.

Fiji is in an APS-C market that has a competitor-Canon. Many expected Canon to come out with a R7-like camera with a stacked BSI sensor and were pissed when they didn't. If Canon had would anyone be considering either Fuji camera? I think not.

Well Canon can come out with a R-7 with a stacked sensor any time they want to, but they have no interest in the M43 market.

OM Systems will bump along making incremental improvements to the OM-1 for more years than will matter to most of us.

Regards,
Tom

 

[abc123brian]

@abc123brian i agree completely. I’m firmly in the mid-range (no A1, z9 or R3).
Most attainable options body wise are Canon R7, which I am not keen on due to the rolling shutter in electronic and relatively loud mechanical. Besides I have zero canon equipment.
The two Fujis I am thinking about here (the spouse uses and likes Fuji colors), and the OM-1, for which @Tom Reynolds makes an excellent case above.
I agree the lens choices are harder outside of the relatively slow zooms.
Perhaps I need to bite the bullet and go for an OM-1 and a couple of lenses. I’ve used an EM-1 ii and a G9 in the past and been OK with the output. I actually really liked the G9 and 100-400mm ergonomics, but got frustrated with the contrast detect AF inconsistencies.
By all accounts, the OM-1 is a new sensor and has very positive reviews. (My only reservations about it have to do with OM being held by a private equity firm). That’s not a photographic decision but a reflection of my appetite for risk. So, i should try an OM-1 and see how it goes. It’s good on the pixels per duck (due to its size) as well as speed (due to stacked sensor).
I’ve already played around with the X-H2s though not with avian subjects.
I shall get back to this thread, hopefully in a week or so to update you on my thoughts on the OM-1.

I would also share those concerns, but if you look at Pentax, they continue to exists so not sure it would be a real issue. I really liked the Fujifilm colors and files overall. I was disappointed with the way it rendered foliage/grass in landscapes. I know some have said the issue was resolved, but I found that it got better but never completely went away. I also didn’t like the particular 100-400mm I had as I found the images to always look a little soft. Overall my reason for mostly abandoning Fuji was the lack of long lenses which they now have a couple options. I really felt like you could almost just shoot jpegs with the Fuji and they looked great with the film simulations.

Nah! Bad assumptions.

OM Systems has a niche that nobody is competing in. Olympus got rid of the division because it was a bit player in the market, not because they couldn't make money with it.

Fiji is in an APS-C market that has a competitor-Canon. Many expected Canon to come out with a R7-like camera with a stacked BSI sensor and were pissed when they didn't. If Canon had would anyone be considering either Fuji camera? I think not.

Well Canon can come out with a R-7 with a stacked sensor any time they want to, but they have no interest in the M43 market.

OM Systems will bump along making incremental improvements to the OM-1 for more years than will matter to most of us.

Regards,
Tom

I agree that OM will likely be around for a while being a niche market but it is also likely to be a shrinking market so overall development may fall as time goes on. I don’t think Canon is going to be the demise of Fujifilm. My opinion is that Fujifilm’s product lines is different and they are expanding into Canon’s market share as opposed to the other way around.

 

[Palmor]

In general a stacked senor would be my 1st choice. Once you start shooting only in electronic shutter without the clack of the mechanical shutter you can't go back (at least for me). Right now I shoot with two setups on opposite ends of the spectrum, A1/600GM and an OM-1/300F4. The Sony is obviously the best of both worlds (resolution and fast) but other than the obvious format differences (FF vs M43 which I'm not going to get into since that always degrades the conversation) the OM-1 is basically a mini A1 IMO. It really has been a joy to use when I want to stay small/light.

Only thing with the OM-1 option is that I personally don't really like the 100-400 lenses. I previously had the Panasonic 100-400 and while it was sharp enough for most things you really need good light to get the most out of the system (I prefer the 300F4 and TC if I need extra reach in good light)... however if you were looking at Fuji 150-600 F5.6-8 there won't be much difference between that and 100-400 lenses.

 

[Bisonbison]

Thanks all for your feedback. I will be testing both the stacked sensor options OM-1 and X-H2s, hopefully side by side and make a final decision as to which way to go. I’ll use this week to plan some real world tests and execute them the following week. If there are any specific things that would be interesting to compare, I’d appreciate your continued feedback.

 

[Nimi]

Thanks all for your feedback. I will be testing both the stacked sensor options OM-1 and X-H2s, hopefully side by side and make a final decision as to which way to go. I’ll use this week to plan some real world tests and execute them the following week. If there are any specific things that would be interesting to compare, I’d appreciate your continued feedback.

And if video is not important, the new XT5 looks good. Good luck, it's a great time to be a photographer.

 

[Chris K]

I shot an XH2S+150-600 briefly and found it to be competent, but not as good as my Z9+500PF for BEAF. It was behind the Z9 in catching an eye in the frame, and it tended to lose/reacquire the eye more frequently. It can certainly do the job, and do it well; it's light-years beyond non-BEAF mirrorless cameras and DSLRs. It's just not quite as good as the Z9-equipped 500PF (and surely by extension, the A1).

Considering the roughly 2x price difference in kits, I think you might say "duh" to that finding. If I were buying both kits new, I would probably have went with the Fuji. As it stood, I had the Nikon kit already, so I returned the Fuji.

If I were coming in clean, I'd ask myself exactly how "perfect" I need my wildlife photography to be. If the answer is "absolute", I'd go Z9 or A1. If the answer is "important, but I do other things", I think Fuji is a great system. It's considerably cheaper, and I (personally, so YMMV) enjoy the Fuji X system for other types of photography more than any other system.

I can't answer the original sensor question yet, because I haven't used an XH2, and my XT5 hasn't arrived yet. The extreme sensor density is certainly intriguing... the XH2 technically has more telephoto reach with a 400mm lens than an OM-1 does, and the XH2 also has RAW pre-capture.