Fuji Should I just drop M4/3's

E

espionage3

Rookie
I am pretty new to the photo and camera world. I bought my first camera this past summer and decided on the Panny GX1. I seem to only shoot it with the 20mm prime and I was looking to upgrade to the OMD and a 25mm prime. Now after a little research the idea of buying a fix lens camera like the X100 might fit my needs better. I shoot 100% with the same lens and have tired zooms and simply do not like the out come. I am starting to think a fixed lens camera might be what I am looking for. Has someone else moved from an interchangeable lens system to a fixed and just dumped their past system? Just need some feedback and opinions. Thanks in advance.
 
Hmm thanks Amin maybe I am just too new to photography to understand my full needs and that they may stray into needing more versatility in the future.

After reading a bit more on these boards I see I am not the only one with similar concerns. It seem the consensus is that the X100 and OMD seem to be quite complimentary to each other. So I guess my next question is should I pick up an OMD first or the X100/X100s? I guess I will just have to deal with cheating on one with the other.
 
It all depends on your preferences, but my strategy has been to avoid duplicating lenses which perform in a similar role across systems. For example, a GX1 and 20mm is going to be pretty similar to an X100S in terms of angle of view, whereas a GX1 and 14mm lens plus an XE-1 and 35mm lens are more complementary. Plus the GX1 and 14 are great for going small, while the Fuji pair is midsized. Another complimentary pair would be X100S plus GX1 with 45mm lens.
 
Yea I totally see your point. I don't think I want to invest in 2 lens systems. I was thinking of using the X100 for my current shooting style and grabbing an OMD for landscape and action shots. That what I am thinking at at least.
 
The GX1 is a fantastic camera and I use both my X100 and my GX1+25mm f1.4 for street work (depends on mood and where I am going but only take one or the other).

Having both formats allows me to improve as a photographer as the equivalent 35mm field of view is different (35mm & 50mm) so forces me to consider more before shooting.

I find the X100 easier to carry as it is small/thin enough to fit under my jacket yet allows easy access for the shot when needed, the GX1 with 25mm is thicker, looks modern and does draw more attention but is fast to focus and does produce great shots (I did shoot more with my GX1 and 2 changeable lenses last year when visiting friends in India- images here:GX1 does Taj Mahal and Delhi ) it is a very under rated camera.

The GX1 with 20mm is a great combo for street work as the 40mm equivalent gives a good perspective and offers a smaller kit but, for me, the X100 offers much better tonal range and makes me think more in use due to more tactile controls.

You do need to do what feels right for you rather than base your equipment choices on other peoples suggestions, what works for them may not for you and again you need to find your own style and individuality.

Good luck though!
 
The biggest, unmentioned issue here, is how "fast" do you need to shoot. The GX-1 is extremely snappy and reactive while the X100.... well. It has its focusing quirks and own decisions for sure ! Now I much prefer the output of the X100, but for me it has proven annoying to the point of uselessness. YMMV, thousands of folks are in love with their X100, but of all the cameras I have at home I pick the NEX 7, X10, GX-1 and X100, in that order (both the NEX and GX-1 giving the exact same FOV with respectively the SEL35 and PL25 mounted).
 
As an only camera? No, I would not want to have only the one focal length to choose from. Too restrictive, too many lost opportunities from having the wrong focal length. As to your question of whether you should switch from Micro 4/3, you need to evaluate the strengths of it versus any other alternatives. For me there is no better option than Micro 4/3 as a main system, even though I might sometimes prefer the output of a Canon G1X, I might love the tactile feel and colours from a Samsung NX200, and I might like to own a Fuji camera at one point. None of them yet match up to the capabilities of an up-to-date Micro 4/3 setup, but they sure do make great companions for it.
 
To the OP, I would say if you already have the GX1 and the 20mm prime, then keep them. Resale prices for the GX1 aren't going to be that great since new examples are going for near-clearance prices these days. Besides, you've haven't said you are displeased with the GX1. You can always add the Panasonic 14mm pancake if you really want to go small. You can pick these up at very friendly prices, both new and used. That would make a great little package all by itself.

The question, at least it seems to me, is whether to add an OM-D or a Fuji to your kit to complement your GX1. Both cameras offer great output. You can use the micro four-thirds lenses that you already have on the Olympus. But the Fuji has a slghtly larger sensor and offers a great external control interface. But I would suggest a Fuji X-E1 rather than an X100 so that you have flexibility going forward. Plus, although you said you don't like zooms, the kit zoom for the X-E1 really is a peach (although you can buy the X-E1 body-only).

Without trying to duck your question, it really is a matter of personal preference. If there's any way to handle the cameras you're interested in at the store, I say that would be very important. If you can't do that, order from a company with very liberal return policies - like B&H or Amazon.com. Order a Fuji and an OM-D, try them for a few days, and return the one you don't like.
 
Yes, dump the camera/system you shoot least. Be it as it may, the internet photo forums are gear-hungry. It is all about gear. And that's okay if you're a collector, but you are a photographer, or desire to be a photographer then trickle in the equipment. Learn one camera/system and even lens before diluting the learning process with new equipment. We all want to shoot like a pro. What makes a pro different than a non-pro? A pro is consistent and the pro gets the defining, decisive and exceptional image, day-in and day-out. How does acquire the pro's atributes? With skills developed through experience, shooting everyday, shoot all sorts of genres in all manner of environments with, (here's the rub), the same equipment. Shooting with that equipment until it becomes an extension on your own eyes and hands. So shoot, shoot again and when you think you're done ... shoot some more. Granted, shooting with the same ol' stuff can get tedious, ain't as much full as equipment. This methodology is the quickest path to attaining pro skills. One's camera handling skills increase and the camera setting will become nearly automatic. One's vision becomes clearer because you have less cameras setting to think about (they've become an automated/semi-conscience thing) and you become more creative because you have limited equipment, (at least until you've grown into the new equipment).

There are always exceptions and there are genres which require more equipment than a semi-wide to normal FOV.

Gary
 
I cannot pretend to be anything other than a photo enthusiast, but I am at that point when I do notice the limitations that m43 presents. I love m43 and wouldn't want to dump it, but I already have an idea of when it might not be enough - so I am looking at Fuji and that gorgeous sensor. :)
 
Great advice, Gary.

I'd just add that I have to temper becoming the best photographer I can with having enough fun with it to keep getting out there to do it ... I'll never be a pro, that's too much like my for-pay work. (No surprise there, eh? ;) )

Yet still, what you say is true - to become the best photographers we can, keep shooting with what we have, and shoot it a lot. I'll take that to heart, thanks!
 
The GX1 is a great camera and the GX1 with the P20 is a terrific, fast AF, kit. That said, The difference between a camera that has interchangeable lenses but you have only a single lens and one that does not is purely semantics. If I were choosing between the Fuji X100s (I would go with the X100s over the X100) and an E-M5 with the an equivalent FL lens I would choose the X100s without even thinking twice about it. The E-M5 gets you the ability to swap lenses but f you don't use it then it's not really any sort of advantage. At that point it comes down to things like IQ, ergonomics, features, controls etc. I don't find the E-M5 particularly comfortable in hand and you won't be gaining any IQ advantage with it (or any m43 camera) but that's just my personal preference. You need to figure out what it is you like in that regard.

I myself like the option to change lenses for different thing so I will probably always keep an interchangeable lens camera around (mine is a NEX) but I COULD use a fixed lens camera like the X100s as my only camera. I'd have to adapt how I do things but there is something to be said for that approach. One thing that fixed lens camera give you that I find useful is the ability to close focus. The X100s has a macro mode of 10cm...you can't get that with a P20 or PL25. I like getting close and the best option I found on m43 was the PL45/2.8 but then you're looking at a 90mm EFL and if you're used to shooting with the P20 that's a really different experience.
 
FWIW, I'm in the 'keep both' camp - although for me, it's an X10 rather than an X100. :)

My GX1 gives me flexibility. For example, I've just started playing with adapting vintage cine lenses, as an inexpensive way to get some interesting effects - can't do that with an X10 (or an X100). I love landscape and architecture photography, and all too often I just can't get the framing I want with a prime lens; same with the auto/aerospace museums I love, the vehicles are often packed in and there just isn't room to get the right vantage for a prime shot. A good zoom lens, or multiple prime lenses, are a must.

OTOH, the X10 is a beautiful instant-reaction camera. I always keep the 20mm f1.7 mounted on the GX1 and if that fits the shot, that's great - but if not, I have to stop and dig out the appropriate lens, switch, and shoot. And by then, the moment may be gone. (Sky/cloud/sunset pics are particularly bad this way.) Whereas the X10 is ready to shoot almost instantly... and I normally carry it in a pocket on my laptop bag, so it's easy to always have with me.

Both of them fit well in the hand and point like a natural extension of it; something I can't say for the Nikon V1 I recently tried.
 
For me, a fixed focal length camera could never be my only camera regardless of how great it was. There are simply some times that you cannot capture what you want to with a single focal length unless you always tend to shoot the same way. I have a 5DII I use for shooting headshots and portraits with studio lighting, and shooting cyclocross racing, and for low light snaps of my wife and daughter around the house. The IQ is great but its annoyingly heavy for me and frankly I don't enjoy shooting it that much, so I don't take it anywhere unless I have a specific purpose for doing so. For travel and as general carry everywhere camera I have an E-PL1 with the 14-150mm range covered by two AF zooms, a 20mm AF prime and some legacy glass. (I take the lens/lenses I feel I want/need for the day). Otherwise if I need a camera in a pinch, I'll use my iPhone. I can't imagine a camera that could serve all my purposes, let along a fixed focal length one. I do agree with Amin about not duplicating focal lengths/apertures with lenses on somewhat comparable camera systems. For example, I'm considering picking up an X100 for general shooting because 35mm is my favourite focal length. If I do, I will most certainly sell my 20mm prime for my m43 camera since in situations where I'd use it, I would instead by using the X100.
 
Thank you all for the opinions. I am set on picking up a X100/X100s for my main camera and keeping the GX1 for events and action shots. I will probably sell my Panny 20mm and pick up a zoom for versatility. I think this will cover all my bases. If I start to develop the need for more versatility I will buy an OMD or future variant at that time. With the plummeting price of the GX1 I may keep it forever. Since it was my first camera I might as well.
 
I bought a preowned X100 in September.
I stopped using my micro4/3's.
When the X E1 came out I was hooked and my dealer gave me fair trade value for my Oly gear.
The X E1 with the wonderful kit lense is in my opinion a great value.
I kept the E PM1 and the panny 20 but still haven't used them.
I like the Fuji system that much more, but I was coming from an E P3 and not the OMD.
This is just a hobby for me but I'm really happy with the upgrade.Still on a learning curve, but that's half the fun.
 
I just used both the X-Pro and the OM-D together, for the first time, shooting the Chinese New Year's parade in Los Angeles. Two very very different cameras. I don't care for the zoom with the optical, hopefully I can make a deal for the 18mm and 35mm. The Om-D is lighting fast and incredibly responsive, the Fuji felt as if I was shooting with a manual film camera. But this was the first time with the Fuji and in a fast moving environment. Posts coming soon ... well posts will be coming, dunno about how soon.

The cameras are so different that I can easily see keeping both for very different reasons. I'll see what happens tomorrow.

Fung Hoy Fat Chow,
Gary
 
I would keep them both, especially as you are still relatively new to photography. It could take years for your style to emerge, and you may find the single lens too limiting. That said, among the best ways I learned good composition was when all I had was the "normal" lens that came with my film camera. It forces you to really learn how to pre visualize your images and to move around to get the right framing.

I shot exclusively with mu-43 for about 2 years after selling off my DSLR gear. When I first got my (used) X100 last year, it became a very complementary tool to my E-P2. When I got a good deal on a used X-Pro1, I stopped using my digital Pens; well, actually, I sold most of the mu43 kit to pay off the purchases of the Xs. Kept the E-PL1 and kit lens, though, which went unused. Now I am seriously back into mu43, and end up using each system for different subjects as well as shooting moods. My E-PL3 tends to be my "no thinking, just shoot intuitively" camera; the Xs require more deliberation, so I use them when I feel like taking my time. I suspect I will use them to make more serious personal projects and photo essays (one of my new year's resolutions). I found the same situation when I shot predominantly film: my OM-1n SLR was for quick intuitive photos or action, my rangefinder was for more reflective shooting.
 

Similar threads

tonyturley
Fuji Just dropping in . . .
Replies
15
Views
986
KillRamsey
KillRamsey
davidzvi
Fuji I know, yet another should I switch to Fuji thread.
Replies
6
Views
2K
davidzvi
davidzvi
bilzmale
    • Like
Micro 4/3 Should I upgrade?
Replies
12
Views
926
davidzvi
davidzvi
Back
Top