DPReview Fujifilm X-H1 Studio Test: Is the Fujifilm X-H1 Image Quality Really better than X-T2?

Fujifilm X-H1 Studio Test

There was quite some buzz in the last days, after…

• imaging-resource posted its X-H1 lab tests showing better high ISO performance for X-H1 over X-T2
• ePHOTOzine said in their review that high ISO is better on X-H1 over X-T2

My own theory was (and still is), that Fujifilm fine tuned the image processing in JPEG files, and hence we see a difference on the X-H1 over the X-T2.

What is sure, is that at very high ISO there are some differences, mostly in favor of the X-H1, but not always.

Now also DPReivew has uploaded their studio lab test, where you can pixel peep again, and also compare the RAW images, as you can see below.

In RAW, the Fujifilm X-H1 does not show, IMO, any improvement over the X-T2. Actually in some cases at highest ISO values, I prefer a the results of the X-T2.

So it’s safe to assume that behind the improvement at high ISO in JPEG there is a fine tuned image processing.

Keep in mind that DPReview uses Adobe Photoshop to demosaic RAW files, which, out of the box with standard settings, is notoriously not the best option for X-Trans files.

I wish they would either adapt the import settings to X-Trans files (as we reported in our debunking X-Trans myths article), or add Iridient & other RAW converters to their lab tests, which do make a better job with X-Trans files out of the box.

By sticking to Adobe default settings, every X-Trans file will always be a bit less sharp than it is when using the default settings of other converters. The ultimate “fair” comparison would be to offer the option to select also the RAW converter along with the camera model. Something like the image below.

Fujifilm X-H1: BHphoto, AmazonUS, Adorama, Focuscamera
Follow FujiRumors on Facebook, RSS-feed, Instagram, Youtube and Twitter
Fujifilm X-H1 Coverage: X-H1 facebook group + X-H1 facebook Page