Huge? I don’t know about that. It’s slightly larger and heavier than the Sony A7III...I love the idea of the xh1, but it's huge. Even if it was the same size as my a7ii I would be interested, but it's bigger. I understand the arguments for larger bodies, but if you shoot primarily under 100mm, it just doesn't seem logical.
I think once the X100F gets to $500 in used status....I'll be getting one. I know, OT...but it's performance has come a long way since the original X100 I had years ago.Yes, some have a preference for the previous sensor over the X-T3. Of course, others have a preference for the original Bayer sensor in the X100.
I'm happy with the X-H1 and X100F. I have noticed it is easier to induce the "worms"/ watercolor effect during post-processing, than the X-E2S (previous sensor).
The IBIS on the X-H1 works great with non-OIS lenses, including adapted lenses. Not sure if/ when Fuji will work it into smaller bodies.
I found the opposite. High iso smearing and waxy skin are gone in the X-T2/X-Pro2. It has gotten much better.It seems that people are reporting as you move up from the original XTrans sensors that hi ISO smearing and waxy skin tones get worse with each iteration. There is loss of fine detail that some find objectionable.
Same boat here. Would love an RF style Fuji camera with IBIS.I'm a big fan of the rangefinder style bodies, not so much the DSLR versions, but the IBIS interested me. I'll hold off hoping the XPro3 or X-E5 (no "4" due to Japanese superstition, right?) has IBIS.
...and I hope their flagships still get built in Japan.