Fujifilm X-M5 Video Auto Focus & Image Quality vs X-H2S

Introduction

In today's article, we will conduct a detailed comparison of the autofocus capabilities and image quality of the Fujifilm X-M5 and X-H2S, both equipped with the latest firmware. For this comparison, we will utilize the Fujifilm 18-55mm f/2.8-4 zoom lens. This choice comes after a recent video I published, where I evaluated the autofocus on the X-H2S using lenses with wider apertures (f/1.4). The aim is to explore how autofocus performs with more affordable lenses, particularly the 18-55mm zoom.

Autocall Focus Testing

Currently, I am recording this segment on the X-M5 using a 33mm f/1.4 lens at f/1.4 to illustrate how the autofocus behaves in a different context. A viewer also requested a comparison of the X-M5’s 6.2K open gate video in F-Log 2 against the X-H2S. Unfortunately, I initially made an error by not setting the X-H2S to open gate mode and failing to match the white balance settings. Moreover, the sharpness and noise reduction settings were not aligned between both cameras. I will address that comparison later in this article.

Understanding Open Gate Mode

If you're unfamiliar with open gate, it's worth noting that most mirrorless cameras feature a 3:2 sensor aspect ratio, while video is typically recorded at a 16:9 aspect ratio. This discrepancy results in cropping the top and bottom of the sensor to achieve the wider format. Cameras like the X-M5 and X-H2S can shoot video using the full sensor without cropping anything out. The advantages of open gate recording include:

Flexibility to crop different aspect ratios (16:9 widescreen, 9:6 vertical video) from the same clip.
Retention of more image data for creative framing without compromising quality.
Unique aesthetic options, with the option of utilizing a 3:2 aspect ratio, which may evoke nostalgia for viewers accustomed to older television formats.

Let's dive back into comparing autofocus.

Autofocus Settings

For both cameras, I used multi-face eye detection with default speed and sensitivity settings. Additionally, I tested my preferred settings of +4 sensitivity and +2 speed. In my previous autofocus test for the X-H2S, I covered many more parameters; however, for this comparison, I opted for the most common settings.

Both the X-M5 and X-H2S display remarkably similar autofocus capabilities. However, one consistent challenge is maintaining stable tracking—especially when it comes to objects that come between the subject and the camera. Notably, during recent tests, I found that both cameras performed well while I moved back and forth in a chair, though the X-H2S demonstrated a better response when I leaned back.

Other improvements include enhanced "stickiness," meaning once a face or eye is detected, it is less likely to get distracted by nearby objects—like the coffee mug used in this test. However, both cameras occasionally lose track of the subject's eye, even when it remains visible.

The X-M5 impressively recognized items on my desk, such as a mouse, which can affect autofocus performance. Additionally, both cameras have improved behavior when a subject leaves the frame, avoiding an immediate focus shift to the background when using higher sensitivity settings.

I also noted some inconsistencies in tracking, particularly when turning in the chair. The initial recognition of my face would transition to tracking my entire body, but then the system seemed to lose focus, potentially searching for other elements in the frame.

Using a lens with a narrower aperture, such as the f/2.8-4 zoom, evidently helps improve autofocus performance, thanks to deeper depth of field, which reduces the visibility of minor tracking errors.

Image Quality Comparison

When comparing image quality, it comes as no surprise that the X-M5 delivers exceptional results, given that it shares the same sensor and processing capabilities as the X-H2S. Both cameras utilize a 26-megapixel sensor, ensuring that the image quality remains highly comparable for stills and video.

For this comparison, I set identical camera settings—sharpness at 4 and noise reduction at minimum—aiming for a raw and unprocessed image output. Upon reviewing the clips, I observed no significant disparities in image quality between the two models after correcting for exposure in post-production.

Conclusion

I believe I've covered all the key points in this comparison. If you have any questions or insights about the X-M5, X-H2S, or Fujifilm's autofocus features, feel free to leave your comments below. Thank you for reading, and I hope to see you in the next article!

Keywords

Fujifilm X-M5
Fujifilm X-H2S
Autofocus comparison
Open Gate
Image quality
F-Log 2
Zoom lens
Depth of field

FAQ

What are the main differences between the Fujifilm X-M5 and X-H2S? The main differences lie in their design and feature sets, but both share similar image quality and sensor capabilities.
How does the autofocus perform in both cameras? Autofocus in both the X-M5 and X-H2S is comparable, but there may be minor inconsistencies depending on tracking situations, especially with objects in between.
What is Open Gate recording? Open Gate recording uses the entire sensor of the camera, allowing for greater flexibility in cropping and maintaining video quality.
Can the autofocus settings be customized? Yes, both cameras offer multiple autofocus settings, including sensitivity and speed, allowing users to adjust based on their preferences.
Is the image quality consistent between the two models? Yes, both the X-M5 and X-H2S offer excellent and comparable image quality owing to their shared sensor and processing technology.