Fuji Has anybody switched from m43 to X100 or viceversa?

[Archiver]

Gary, that is a very interesting comparison and one that I read with interest. I did some shooting at the Chinese New Year festival in Melbourne, and I used the OM-D and the Leica M9. The OM-D is, as you say, so very fast and responsive, and I really enjoyed shooting with it and the 45mm and 75mm Oly lenses. The M9 handled the 50mm and wide angle duties, and with the lens in zone and hyperfocal shooting I didn't miss much with it, either. Slow AF bugs the heck out of me when I'm trying to shoot something fast moving like a lion dance. This is why I am skipping the X-mount cameras until they come to the party re. AF speed.

 

[Ray Sachs]

If I had to choose between the two cameras, I would take the OM-D, it is fast, it is responsive, it delivers a great image. Even though I've only used the camera a few days, I would sorely miss the X-Pro. It has a unique feel and usability. The OM-D may be able to shoot rings around the Fuji, but the camera feels cold, a product of mass production. The Fuji feels handcrafted, while not nearly as responsive or versatile as the OM-D, the Fuji still has a ton of charm which makes you feel good when shooting with her.

Gary

Gary, you've reached the same conclusion very quickly that I've come to after having both cameras for the better part of a year now. I don't frankly find the X-Pro nearly as slow and frustrating as you do, but I'd had the X100 for a year already to learn to speak Fuji and I had some early frustrations with THAT camera as I learned to shoot with the Fuji and the OVF in particular.

But I too would keep the OMD if I could only keep one. Partly because of its performance advantage, but mostly because of its incredible versatility and variety of lenses. I'd be extremely, overwhelmingly bummed to have to lose the Fuji, but there's nothing I can do with the Fuji that I can't do as well or very nearly as well with the OMD. But there's plenty I can do with the OMD that I couldn't do or do nearly as well with the Fuji. That's a pretty overwhelming conclusion in comparing the two systems.

But the differences are much more critical and important at the longer end of the focal range than the wider end. I've never had any problem getting the shot with the Fuji up to the 35mm equivalent of the X100. For anything 35 or wider its been a total non-issue whether using auto or zone focus. At neutral 50-55mm focal lengths, comparing the Pany 25 with the Fuji 35, I start to see a difference, but I've still gone with Fuji for the infrequent occasions I use those focal lengths. But for portrait length or longer, I can't see using anything but the OMD. The combination of instant AF, effective tricks like face detection, the ibis that stabilizes the EVF (which is HUGE at longer focal lengths) just makes it an easy and obvious call.

I'm definitely staying with m43 for anything about 90mm equivalent and longer. I'll mostly use the Fuji as my walking around setup at the wider focal lengths I usually prefer and once the 10-24 comes around, Fuji may take on a pretty big majority of my shooting because I spend a lot more time at the wide end than long. But I'll no doubt hang onto the Olympus 12mm because I love the Oly flip up screen and that lens for street shooting. I like the Fuji with the 14 and 18 well enough for street shooting too, but the Oly 12 slots in there really nicely and allows me a style of shooting like nothing else.

So it's an absolutely wonderful mix. I'd HATE to have to go with one or the other. But if I ever did, I'd go the same way you would - with m43. As Fuji continues to expand and improve the system, though, who knows - even that could change.

-Ray

 

[carlb]

My walk around rig is moving toward: X-E1 with the 18-55mm, EM5 probably with the Oly 75mm (when I save up a bit for the 75mm) and keep the Oly 9-18mm on hand. The 18-55mm will provide most of the shots, the EM5 providing short telephoto with bokeh and wide-angle in a small package.

I like the Fuji controls better and the Fuji form-factor a bit better than the EM5's (the EM5 is pretty good though), but the EM5 can provide the extremes in a smaller package.

Both cameras have great image quality, but I think I give the edge to Fuji on that (if I get the exposure right ).

I'll probably also keep the sealed Oly 12-50mm, that with the EM5 for inclemental shoots and a bit of macro.

 

[Gary]

Gary, that is a very interesting comparison and one that I read with interest. I did some shooting at the Chinese New Year festival in Melbourne, and I used the OM-D and the Leica M9. The OM-D is, as you say, so very fast and responsive, and I really enjoyed shooting with it and the 45mm and 75mm Oly lenses. The M9 handled the 50mm and wide angle duties, and with the lens in zone and hyperfocal shooting I didn't miss much with it, either. Slow AF bugs the heck out of me when I'm trying to shoot something fast moving like a lion dance. This is why I am skipping the X-mount cameras until they come to the party re. AF speed.

Remember, this was my first time with the X-Pro. I didn't know quite what to expect. I know I missed a lot of shots due to the slow start-up, AF and write time(s). But I think I've nailed quite a few also. (I haven't looked at the X-Pro images as I've been very busy processing some deadline stuff.)

I am learning to compensate for the Fuji, I've extended my shut-off time, lowered my burst rate from six to single and have mentally adjusted how I shoot with the Fuji (anticipate more than react). Normally, I would dump a camera rather than make these accommodations ... it is like taking out the prettiest girl in school ... you're willing to make some changes to your style ... just for the dance.

Gary

 

[Gary]

... So it's an absolutely wonderful mix. I'd HATE to have to go with one or the other. But if I ever did, I'd go the same way you would - with m43. As Fuji continues to expand and improve the system, though, who knows - even that could change.

-Ray

I echo you Ray. But remembrer, as Fuji grows and expands with enhancements, so does µ4/3. Maybe the EM-7 will be more delightful and charming than the Fuji's. It is good to have options.

G

 

[Ray Sachs]

I echo you Ray. But remembrer, as Fuji grows and expands with enhancements, so does µ4/3. Maybe the EM-7 will be more delightful and charming than the Fuji's. It is good to have options.

G

True, but m43 already does everything I'd want it to and many things I'll never do with it. And all as well as I'd ever hoped for. So I'm less likely to find the improvements as important as the catching up that Fuji may yet do. I'm OK with both of them as they are, and love the choice, but I'd like Fuji even a bit more with some improvements in the snappy-ness department. Except for tracking AF, m43 is fully realized for me, and tracking AF really doesn't figure into my shooting enough to matter. So they'll both improve, but I'm more likely to find the Fuji improvements compelling, at least for the next couple of years. I can't see too clearly beyond that...

-Ray

 

[Crsnydertx]

As a primarily Panasonic MFT user, I haven't been able to generate the same kinds of feelings about my cameras that the EM-5 crowd has. I long ago decided that the EM-5 and most of the Olympus lenses were too costly for my taste, so now I'm looking very seriously at cleaning house of my MFT gear and going all in on Fuji. I might keep the GH2 and a couple lenses to experiment with video, but beyond that I see little reason to maintain a cabinet full of stuff I don't and won't use. I'm really developing an attachment to both my X10 and X100, and watching numerous videos on the X20, X100S and X-E1 has not been good for my GAS self-control....

 

[Armanius]

Normally, I would dump a camera rather than make these accommodations ... it is like taking out the prettiest girl in school ... you're willing to make some changes to your style ... just for the dance.

Gary

LMAO!!! That was my thought exactly about this hot girl I tried really hard to like for something other than her looks. Eventually had to say bye ... just like I did to the XP1 and XE1. But unlike hot girl nowadays, there's nothing preventing me from getting the XP2/XE2.

On a more serious note, I'm hoping that Fuji will close the operational performance gap soon with the next generation of X cameras.

 

[Crsnydertx]

On a more serious note, I'm hoping that Fuji will close the operational performance gap soon with the next generation of X cameras.

Isn't the X100S supposed to be a speed demon? Not unreasonable to believe that whatever they're doing to the X100S will move into the next generation of Fuji interchangeable lens models...

 

[Ray Sachs]

Isn't the X100S supposed to be a speed demon? Not unreasonable to believe that whatever they're doing to the X100S will move into the next generation of Fuji interchangeable lens models...

Yeah, the X100s is, by all accounts, quite fast. I'm sure the future X-Pro and other ILC X-bodies will be able to incorporate those same types of improvements. But I'm far less sure about the existing lenses. Will the relatively slow focus motors in the existing Fuji lenes (even the newly released 14mm) work well with the hybrid PDAF/CDAF that they've clearly figured out how to make work in the X100? I don't know, but I have my doubts. Probably an easier thing to control in a fixed lens where you can significantly tweak the lens working between two models. Not so much with an ILC where all you're tweaking is the body. Micro Four Thirds had a minor bit of this predicament in the early days, but the only lenses affected were some early kit lenses and two primes - the 17 and 20. The 17 was always pretty inexpensive (well, maybe not right at first) and has now been replaced with a faster lens. The 20 just sort of gained a faster companion in the 25 but is still out there as a really nice, but really slow to AF lens.

So, I remain hopeful, but I have my reservations. I'd be willing to buy a new body, but not all new lenses...

-Ray

 

[ean10775]

^I think Ray is probably right on the money with this. If the rumors that an X-Pro 2 will come mid summer with an X-E2 to follow at the end if the year are true, that may be why Fuji deviated from the lens roadmap date for the 23mm. Maybe it needed a redesign to work with the hybrid AF. Who knows though - it's all just speculation at this point.

 

[Armanius]

I'd be willing to buy a new body, but not all new lenses...

-Ray

My thoughts exactly. Hence one of the reasons I'm trying to wait for the 2nd gen XP2/XE2 and see how they work with the 1st gen lenses, even though I'm tempted to just re-get either the XP1 or XE1 with all the currents discounts.

 

[serhan]

Here is Jordan's review of xe-1 vs GH3 vs OMD:
http://admiringlight.com/blog/mirrorless-battle-om-d-vs-gh3-vs-x-e1/

 

[Frenchman]

The OM-D may be able to shoot rings around the Fuji, but the camera feels cold, a product of mass production. The Fuji feels handcrafted, while not nearly as responsive or versatile as the OM-D, the Fuji still has a ton of charm which makes you feel good when shooting with her.

The OM-D does feel cold. Too serious. I got one a few days before Olympus's $100 instant rebate ended. Then I ordered an X-E1 two days ago because of all the raving; I did not want to risk getting the "wrong" camera, and I initially wanted a rangefinder style camera with an onboard flash and a viewfinder. I certainly dislike the ineffective autofocus of the X-E1. And it's still as big as the EM-5 and not that pocketable (we're talking coat pockets!).

And then I realized that as I am learning to be better in photography, there is a definitive poesy to black and white and 35mm and I am interested in mostly shooting that way. So I am extremely likely to return both and order an X100S. I feel crazy: it's a huge amount of money for a fixed lens camera, and for B&W! but I hope it will be one that will always be with me because it seems truly pocketable.

 

[cherrywood]

If you are looking for a comparison between the X100 and a m43 setup like the OM-D, I can offer one.

The OM-D, particularly with new lenses, offers much faster and more responsive camera than the X100. AF is super fast and accurate, with almost no racking of the lens for focus in difficult conditions. Burst mode is much faster, shot to shot time is almost like a pro level DSLR, and the entire shooting experience is one of ease.

Today I was shooting with the X100 for Chinese New Year, along with the OM-D. I really noticed the difference in AF speed; where the OM-D seemed like it locked on instantly, I could feel the X100's AF motor whirring in my hand. It was quite noticeable. There was an unfortunate difference in shutter lag as well.

On the other hand, the X100 delivers an entirely different colour profile and look when compared with the OM-D. In many ways I prefer the way Fuji does colour, particularly the X100. There is an emphasis on blues, greens and yellows that I really like, and skin tones with the X100 are very nice indeed. The OM-D, when shot in raw and processed with Lightroom, tends towards a much warmer, redder tone. Skin ends up looking more brown or yellow rather the the usual Fuji creaminess Interestingly, even the X10, with its 2/3" EXR sensor, delivers a more accurate and pleasing (to me) colour profile than the OM-D.

Also, the X100 has files that just seem to have more 'depth', and this is not a comment about shallow depth of field. I think that the aps-c sensor of the X100 is able to show more subtle gradations of colour than the OM-D, which adds a sense of richness and depth that the OM-D doesn't have, IMO.

Being used to the speed of the OM-D, I found the X100 a touch annoying in the AF speed and shutter lag. On the other hand, whenever I pressed the shutter button of the X100, I knew that I had just produced another image with those lovely Fuji colours, so the trade off was just about even. In less demanding conditions, like simple snapshots or slightly more deliberate shooting, this would not be an issue for an X100 user.

Well reasoned and interesting perspective. Thanks
Dennis

 

[Gary]

The OM-D does feel cold. Too serious. I got one a few days before Olympus's $100 instant rebate ended. Then I ordered an X-E1 two days ago because of all the raving; I did not want to risk getting the "wrong" camera, and I initially wanted a rangefinder style camera with an onboard flash and a viewfinder. I certainly dislike the ineffective autofocus of the X-E1. And it's still as big as the EM-5 and not that pocketable (we're talking coat pockets!).

And then I realized that as I am learning to be better in photography, there is a definitive poesy to black and white and 35mm and I am interested in mostly shooting that way. So I am extremely likely to return both and order an X100S. I feel crazy: it's a huge amount of money for a fixed lens camera, and for B&W! but I hope it will be one that will always be with me because it seems truly pocketable.

The French are a fickled people ... ... I am glad you're resolved your needs and desires.

Gary

 

[Landshark]

Like many others have stated the OMD is the more versatile camera, but if I kept just one of the two it would be the Fuji by a long shot. Honestly anything I need to shoot with blazing fast AF, I will just grab one of my work Canons, which brings me to the reason I like using my Fuji bodies, for this type of shooting, I do not want to feel like I am working. I want to just shoot for the fun of it and the AF in the XPRO is more than fast enough for what I want to shoot. I like that the XPRO makes me want to shoot, I just want to hold it and shoot, it reminds me of shooting film, where the OMD I am sorry to say feels a little soulless, it has features I appreciate but do not find a real need for, except the image stabilization which is incredible. So now I am down to one OMD body and the 75 because of its unique length, 12-50 only keeping this as my weather setup, 7-14 because Fuji makes nothing this wide and the 12 with which I have a debate with myself many times about whether to keep or sell, great lens, but will see little action now that I have the 14 for the XPRO.

 

[Lawrence A.]

I'm one of those who likes the look and feel of the E-M5, maybe because I shot the film OM system, and it feels as "right" in my hand as the OM-1 does. It's certainly not as beautiful as the Fujis, and an optical viewfinder is a wonderful thing. Right now the X100 (coming tomorrow!) will have to do, but the X-Pro intrigues me -- the XE-1 less so, because part of the draw of the X-Pro would be the optical finder. The E-M5 already has a great EVF and is so functionally delightful that, while I'll probably gradually buy more in the Fuji X system, I think I'm with m4/3 to stay. I simply love shooting with the E-M5.

Now --- E-M7 should be something.

I echo you Ray. But remembrer, as Fuji grows and expands with enhancements, so does µ4/3. Maybe the EM-7 will be more delightful and charming than the Fuji's. It is good to have options.

G

 

[zephyr2013]

I like m4/3, especially its body IS, and its doubling up of the focal length is just great, I don't have to carry huge lenses. I have not exactly switched, I just keep my m4/3 as backup. End of the day, I prefer the IQ of the Fuji. I have shot thousands of beautiful images with m4/3, my Fuji use will have to keep up

 

[the Tif]

thanks for a lot of post in this thread.
I m still thinking about changing from Olympus mFT to Fuji, but i ll start slowly with a X20 and wait for the next generation X-mount camera before i decide if i ll really change. Maybe ill just add a X100s instead of leaving mFT behind.

The thing why i thought about a complete change, is that i dont like a mixed workflow with different Camera-Systems. I think i ll try Raw development in LR with some Fuji files compared with some Oly files.