My X-H2 photos

Well, I've been around to various places with my X-H2 at this point and have a nice collection of photos to share. I just recently got the pro lenses for it, so I'll be using those mostly (16-55 and 50-140) but I will probably be taking the 16-80 on my Europe trip in June, just because it's more flexible and I only want to deal with one lens.

I'm really happy with my X-H2. It's working out well.

Here's the gallery (it's just photos, no ads, etc...purely photos): www.thephotographyhobbyist.com/CAMERAGEAR/Fuji-X-H2-Gallery/

A wonderful series of images.

Thank you :)

All very nice. Several wall hangers there for sure.

Very nice!

Great set. I'm sure it will serve you well in Europe.

Bob

A lot of really good pictures. Thanks for sharing!

Thanks everyone :)

I like it well enough that I sold my Nikon Z7 II (because I also heard the Z8 will be bigger and a lot more expensive than the Z7, so that mostly ruled out that as an option for me to get a better overall great shooting camera (good C-AF, tracking, DR, etc, etc).

Nice photos.

Now that I have been around Italy for 10 days I have one observation. The 16mm wide end (24mm FF equivalent) is sometimes not wide enough to get church facades, interiors, other buildings, etc. in one frame. I have had to resort to hand-held panos and that is somewhat problematic.

Since noise can be more easily dealt with using some of the current AI apps, I would humbly suggest considering something wider. I "had " the 14 but I wasn't satisfied with the IQ. Maybe it was a less than optimal copy. Unfortunately I did not bring my 10-24. It may be an older lens but it would have solved my issue. In fact, I may have had that lens on more often than not visiting certain venues.

If you saw my Colosseum pic I posted a week ago, that had to be done as a Pano. The IQ was probably better. However the convenience factor of a super wide angle prime or Zoom would be nice. In fact the image I posted less than 12 hours ago inside the Church of St. Anthony in Padua would have been a lot easier with the 10-24. Especially in silent mode. The 10-24 is not a light lens, but if your back can tolerate it, that would be my "additional" Europe travel recommendation.

Nothing is a better teacher than experience.

Bob

Thanks :)

I agree. I have the 8-16 f/2.8 but I admit I haven't used it much yet. I don't normally need a super wide lens but thought while I had the chance to get it when swapping gear, I did.

I couldn't agree more. While traveling, particularly in Europe, cathedral interiors are one of my very favorite things to photograph. From my experience, anything much longer than 12mm is less than ideal for capturing these incredible places. My Zeiss 12 was my standby for many years, but more recently replaced with an 8-16... nearly the perfect lens for these sorts of locations. I would definitely recommend something in the 12mm range or even a bit wider, if possible. I often use a column to stabilize the camera and to enable a fairly long exposure, since tripods are generally not welcome or practical in these locations.

Enjoyed your images, I think they are very nice. The 16-80 lens looks like a fine performer. A keeper for sure. Interesting that many on the web
don't think its so good as you have proven it to be.

I would suggest steering well clear of both “A”, and f/22 and making the effort to set the aperture yourself for each and every situation. If there’s an exposure parameter where manual full-time control has the potential to significantly advance your photography, it would be that one.

Yup... took me a while to figure that out as well, but finally ended up getting an 8-16 f/2.8 both for astro and interior shots... cathedral interiors in particular. My 12mm Zeiss Touit was my go to for that purpose for years, but after acquiring the 8-16 (and deciding that I could live with the additional weight/bulk), it has served me very well for the same sorts of shots that you've shared here. I've also used the 10-24 in the past, and it's more than adequate for this sort of photography as well, as long as you can find a way to stabilize the camera. I usually just lean the camera against a pillar inside a cathedral to get the stabilization I need, since tripods are a strict no-no. I guess having gotten used to handling big lenses (like the 100-400 and 150-600) for years, I just don't stress over the weight and I've found that the additional effort is more than worth it, for me at least, given the fact that locations like this are often once-in-a-lifetime opportunities.

Enjoy the trip... it sounds epic.