D600, OM-D, % X-E1 on Hand...Questions or test shots?

I currently have all three on hand.  Disclaimer - I'm not a pro.  However, if you would like some comparative shots or have questions I'll do my best to help.

Lenses: 50 1.8g, 85 1.8g, 25 1.4, 45 1.8, 35 1.4, 60 2.4 Macro

Cheers!

I'm on the fence between OM-D and X-E1.
How big is the difference in AF and handling between omd + 25/45 and xe1+ 35 (new kit would have been better). Same question IQ wise, are there noticeable differences between oly with one of those lenses and fuji with the 35 (dynamic range, color rendition, shadow detail, especially in low light). I expect oly to be faster and fuji to have the better stills, but the question is how big is the gap.

Thanks,
Paul

Thanks, I would like to see some nice portraits, both headshot and fullbody, to compare bokeh

How about a 50mm equivalent comparison since you happen to have the Nikon 50 1.8g, Fuji 35mm f1.4, and Panny Leica 25mm f1.4. I'm curious to see the differences.

The gap in IQ is not huge Paul, and for me I could not make a decision on that alone. The real question is whether you need the performance features of the OMD such as weather sealing and speed and all the other goodies which make the camera so satisfying to use. I've posted my initial impressions of both cameras on my blog (OMD with the PL25 f1.4 and the XE-1 with the new zoom). Further examples such as portraits will follow in due course. I'm not interested in data sheets and numbers, just real world performance. I can say that both cameras are excellent though the Fuji is slower to focus than expected (given the hype). It really comes down to what (and how) you shoot and your list of 'needs' vs 'wants'.

We are in the Fuji X system forum so I would expect respondents to naturally back up the Fuji but I have no particular brand allegiance. I suggest you try and visit a camera store and get a feel for both cameras. The buttons are smaller on the OMD which may make it a little more fiddly to handle if you have large hands. u4/3 lenses are superb but may make an OMD kit more costly than the Fuji with the supplied zoom.

http://lindsaydobsonphotography.com/blog/olympus-omd-em-5-vs-fujifilm-xe-1/

I'd be most interested in the ability to retain highlights.

When I was looking at the EM-5, the one issue I had (apart from more limited DoF) was that it seemed very easy to blow the highlights. This is strange, as I know the EM-5 has a wide dynamic range. However, compared to what I saw from the X-Pro, and the X100 that I have now, the highlights are definitely more vulnerable. This makes much more difference to me than I would have thought beforehand - blown highlights really take you out of the image, reminding you that it's a construct.

Lindsay, thanks for the review, I really enjoyed the pics and your comments were very helpful.
I agree with you that numbers are just numbers and one should choose only after playing with both cameras in store. Currently in my area X-E1 is not available yet i(checked with a couple of stores and they said that it should become available in a matter of days). So all I have to do is wait and be patient.

Paul

Previous incarnations of u4/3 sensors were a little savage on highlights but that has improved tremendously with the OMD. I specifically conducted the above tests in very bright contrasty mid day sun and my test images retained detail in a more than satisfactory manner. The Fuji sensor is of course known for it's excellent dynamic range but the differences between the OMD and the XE-1 in this regard are not massive at all. I would summarise by saying the the DR of the OMD is impressive and certainly within the parameters I set for my professional work. Image quality is of course dependent as much on the experience and skills of the user and accurate metering of any challenging scene is a pre-requisite.

Heading out to lunch.  Will reply to all in early afternoon ET.

some people shots and people in low light shots would be great.

Hi Lindsay, i already visit your web. Thanks it's awesome

from what i see, OMD's colors tend to green-blue for the sky and kinda yellow (warm color). Meanwhile Fuji's color for the sky is almost actual blue (more strong blue from actual i guess) and mostly tend to blue (cool color).

Hmmm hard to choose....hahahaha their both are great cameras and have their own strengths and weaknesses.

Hi Reza, the OMD output can be fine tuned very easily, and the Fuji colour can be adjusted in-camera too. In my article I left it 'as is' but switched off the added warmth on the Oly which is an option in one of the menus. You can moderate the warmth or coolness to taste and it was very easy to match the OMD colour to the Fuji colour, for occasions where I shoot both cameras side by side. The colours of both are very pleasing however. The IQ of both is so good that it would not be a determining factor for me (though I cannot speak for others) whereas handling is different. This can be key - the OMD has very small buttons which I imagine some people with larger hands might find fiddly. I encourage anyone considering either camera to get on in their hands, that can so often be the deal breaker/maker.

So I got overwhelmed at work yesterday and didn't have time to respond.  I do now.  Here are a few inside shots.  All straight from the camera.

The OMD focuses faster.  It feels like a DSLR.  I don't have any problems with the X-E1 though, fast enough for my style.  Moving kids or pets?..the OMD wins.

Both lenses are sharp.  I do like the Fuji better though.  I think it has a better sharp over blurry presentation (some of that is due to the slightly lar

ger sensor).  It just gives me the 3d effect that I loved with my Leica R lenses.

Also, I like shooting OOC JPEG.  I LOVE LOVE LOVE the Fuji OOC shots.  Color and WB are just spot on.  The Oly tends to be a bit yellow/orange at times.  I assume shooting RAW would narrow the playing field (and of course their are some small issues with RAW support on the FUJI).  Ultimately I'm no PS or LR guru and I liken the Fuji JPEGs to having an artist (who's work I like) edit my photos.

FOR ME the Fuji is much better IQ-wise and I'm willing to make the small sacrifices that come with it.  I do wish it had a tilt screen, light peaking, and faster focus.  All in all the focus is the one that you cannot get around.  If your shooting action the Fuji is tough...not impossible, but tough (I don't really like zone focusing, but for street shooting it is a work around).

I've been lurking for  awhile around here, as I'm really interested in the X-E1.  Looking at these two photos I had a couple of thoughts.  Let me say that I don't have any of these cameras, I'm going off my research for surfing the net.  I don't have any way to see any of this stuff in person where I live, so I go by what I've got (which admittedly isn't much) to make my decision on which to buy.  In my case I'm looking at the EX1 or OMD.

I know you basically tried to get the exposures between these two to match up.  First off, I think the EM5 shot has that Oly orange cast to it, maybe try turning off the warming effect in the menus.  I've read (I think it was in Lindsey D's blog) that this makes the colors more comparable.

Second, it looks like the EX1 shot is exposed less than the OMD.  I've read somewhere that the EX1 ISO indications are higher than reality.  It looks to me that this has an effect of making the OMD look like some of the detail is getting lost in the stronger highlights in the leaves of the bush.

I would actually compensate for the possibly overrated EX1 ISO's, by changing the ISO setting of both cameras to 400, and stopping down the lens on the OMD one stop, plus a touch for the ISO difference.

I might be totally off on this, but I'm guessing this would bring the exposure between the two cameras more in line.  I'm also thinking that it should equal out the difference in sharpness from a wide open 1.4 lens to better match an 2.8 lens.  I know they're both wide open in the above shot, but wouldn't it be a closer match to get closer to the same f-stop?  I also know that the DOF might not be quite as comparable because of the sensor crop difference, but with that background so far off, maybe it doesn't matter?

Somehow the other two are muted.  Not as bright.  My E-M5 was too contrasty, too sharp and digital,  the Fuji colors more true, with better WB.

I can agree with that from what I see.  I guess what I'm wondering is with all the ability to customize the OMD, can it be set to match (closely) the EX1 output (as for the colors anyway)?

Yes, the OMD can easily be customized to match the fuji colours. The native OMD white balance is a little warmer than the fuji (assuming you have also switched off the extra warming option in the menus), but cooling it a notch brings the colour well in line with the XE-1, if that is what you want. However many people prefer the slightly warmer OMD files. It's purely down to personal taste. Overall the white balance interpretation of the Fuji X cameras in pretty much any scenario is spot on, better than any of my DSLRs. The Oly tends to run cooler under incandescent lighting.

This.

Sometimes I have to take picture in darkness without flash nor AF assist light (club, lounge, etc) and I would like to know which of the three with fast prime can AF accurately in very very low light.

The darkest my X-E1 + 35 f/1.4 can AF accurately is at ISO6400, f/1.4, 1/4s. Only 1 in 3 tries achieved AF lock.

Thank you

E-M5 is a fine camera, but pictures are somber and too contrasty, too digital, too sharp.

X-E1 reminds me of Leica X1 (which had it) vs. Leica X2 (which didn't)

X-E1 reminds me of M9.  Even better, like Ken Rockwell says.

Ken Rockwell loves the X100, the X-E1 he calls better than the M9, and he's got the whole Leica Ms to play with.