X20 - alternatives anyone ?

Now that I've sold my NEXes (5, 5n, 7) and some more gear, left with nothing but my trusty X10 I'm still torn between the X20 and the OM-D (E-PL5). I really don't want to own more than one, relatively compact, fast and flexible camera that serves all my photographic needs, including clean large (20+ inches) prints. Someone else mentioned the Panny GX1 a while ago but I'd prefer the Olys ... faster AF ?!, flip screen, Oly jpgs and colors (skin!). Next to the X20 (X10) the OM-D with a standard zoom seems fairly large, but that's about the only drawback that holds me back from buying it. We all have to wait and see if Fuji holds up to their promises, but if they do the X20 could be the new king of compact cams and the only way to top its IQ and speed, while keeping it relatively compact would lead straight into m43 territory.

Have I overlooked something ? Anything new on the horizon ? (Canon's G1X and the RX100 don't cut it for me)

Pentax MX-1    

--
Alan.
It is better to keep your mouth closed and let people think you are a fool than to open it and remove all doubt.
Mark Twain

For a one camera solution I'd choose the OM-D then. After all, the X20 won't be the ideal camera for large, noiseless prints. As a secondary camera it promises to be very much ok though. I may buy a X20, for travel and holidays, to bring along with my X100. For large and noiseless images I'll use my Nikon dslr.

--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/lucdeschepper/

For me, a fixed lens (even a VERY good one) camera is just a different animal than an interchangeable lens camera.  I wouldn't presume to know which would suit you better, but I do think that multiple makers using a common lens mount (in this case, M4/3) is a very interesting concept.  Just imagine if you could put Nikkors on a Sony A99, or Sony Zeiss glass on a D-1X:  This is what's hapening in M4/3.

I suppose we'll have to see IF the X20 pans out once it's in our hands.  On the other hand, the sense I get about the OM is that it's a game changer.  Interesting in that it's so X-like, old school form factor, metal build, etc.

All the Best,

JW

For versatility, and better IQ (in particular, high ISO performance) you'd be better off with the OM-D. For some the X20 could be a primary camera, but for most, a larger sensor ILC would fill that roll better. You might also consider the Olympus E-PL5 for a small camera with an articulated LCD. It has the same sensor as the EM-5, but lacks the built-in EVF (it does accept the Olympus VF-2 EVF).

The OM-D is excellent, but if you want a camera with even better IQ and more DOF control, you might have a look at the wonderful APS-C Fuji X cameras like the X-E1, X-Pro1 or X100s. You'll get cleaner low-light/high ISO images (and base ISO images), Fuji's terrific colors, and in the case of the X-E1, one of the best EVF available (same 2.3 million pixel EVF found in the NEX-7).

As far as the X20, I've pre-ordered it to use when it's not practical to bring my Nikon D800. I love the look of the X10 images (colors, sharpness, etc) and the handling and manual controls on the X10 are about the best I've ever used on a compact. And there is no doubt with the new X-Trans sensor, the lack of an AA-filter, PDAF, and the improved VF, the new X20 is going to be one of the very best compacts available.

So while I'm a big fan of the X10/X20, I see them more as second cameras. YMMV.

Best of luck, Markus

Thanks for your input so far.'Much appreciated ! If it weren't for those large print jobs I'd happily continue shooting my X10, enjoy a deep sleep and shut the heck up, but no ...

After two-and-a-half years with the NEXes (Δ£¢℅¿) and some years with the wonderful old OM-system (back in the 80s) the OM-D looks like the only option left for a 'compact' one-camera-solution.

@JW: game-changer(s), yep ! Unfortunately both of them, the X20 and the OM-D.

Anyone else ?

Just for the files:

Thanks Markus ! I love my X10 to bits, but that doesn't help me too much when it comes to larger gallery prints. I've also tried the X-E1 for three days. A wonderful camera with a killer zoom lens!, acceptable EVF (WAY better than that on the NEX-7), magnificent jpgs, but lousy AF performance in low-light and no focus peaking or flip screen. If I go with a larger cam than the X20, excellent glass, flip screen, fast, reliable AF and useable VF are on top of my list > OM-D. I'll also spend the next couple years somewhat closer to the equator, so give a slight nod to a built-in VF, despite the additional bulk in that case.

(Gone are those times when I used to shoot my Nikon F3 for many years without looking elsewhere.)

Any OM-D shooters around ? Mind to share some experiences and/or comparisons ?

I too am looking at the $600.00 range and to my thinking the true matchup for the X20 is the Oly ZX-2 and not the OMD.  The price differential is to great to think the choice is between comprable cameras.  The OMD nicer for sure but much harder on the wallet.

I am considering the ZX-2 over the X20 (which sounds fabulous) because of Oly's superior JPEGs and the apparent lack of quality support for the X20 raw images coming off of the new sensor design.

Just my thoughts.

Good luck.

--
Gary Leland

To say that the Oly has superior jpegs is a very very questionable statement at this point....

If you can get by with the X10 for a while - see what new introductions there are at this show.  Oly is rumoured to be introducing an XZ10 - who knows maybe the next OMD as well.

Thanks Gary. I had a chance to try the ZX-2 in a relatively dark store for about half an hour. While I liked a lot about the camera, especially the fast lens, the flip screen and the snappy AF, from ISO800 upwards the jpgs looked quite mushy. I guess the noise reduction was set on default and you could get better results from RAW files and the right settings once you know your way around the camera. I wouldn't be too surprised though if the X20 gave it a run for its money IF Fuji hasn't promised too much. The lack of adequate RAW support for Fujis exotic CFA designs has p....ed me off long enough but a few days ago Trevor has posted some X-Trans conversions via SilkyPix that looked rather promising and I'm somewhat optimistic (blue-eyed) that at some point Adobe will offer a solution that matches or even surpasses the quality of in-cam RAW conversion. Again, time will tell. Regarding the budget issue the extra couple hundreds are a little price to pay for the peace of mind I'm looking forward to and NOTHING compared to the time I wasted comparing spec sheets.

Finally ... just curious ... what's superior about Oly's jpgs ? I mainly shoot RAW, but IMO the jpgs from Fujis X-series are hard to beat.

I just read the DPreview preview because of your post. However it seems like mostly a me-too product, in no way amazing.

Did I miss something?

Evoprox, my main problem with the OM-D E-M5 is the lack of any zoom lens that really stands out. Guess I would buy a Panasonic 14-45/3.5-4.5 on the secondary market. Or you could go with a set of primes, but then you're back to swapping lenses. I don't really like the 12-60/3.5-6.3, too slow.

I know that I rarely post on this forum (don't know why though) - but I do have the X-10 and absolutely love that camera. My copy is superb to say the least and it's stayin' in my collection.

But I have to state that I've also been using micro 4/3 products - well, actually, I've been on the 4/3 bandwagon ever since the release of the ole' Olympus E-1 (5 MP) DSLR (which I still maintain).  As such, I recently purchased an E-PL5 to upgrade my current m4/3 collection... and mannnnn, was I pleasantly surprised. I managed to get one at a great deal via B&H (who had it for a few days at only $549) along with the kit 14-42 II R lens (equivalent to a 28-84 zoom). When I first saw the photos of the E-PL5, I had assumed it would be a medium sized budget model, but wow was I surprised when it first arrived.

First of all, it's only a tad larger (not by much) than the X-10 (go figure), and it's a solid little booger with a superb finish and excellent ergonomics. The 16 MP sensor on that baby is the same one employed in Olympus's top of the line OMD EM-5 and it shows and it captures images with a superb, dynamic color tonality. High ISO capabilities are excellent - with results at ISO 2000 through 3200 that had me just shakin' my head (in a positive way).

I've since purchased several lenses for it (no primes yet) - and focused mostly on zoom lenses for the "flexibility" factor. I managed to get the 12-50 zoom (equivalent to a 24-100), and the Olympus 14-150 zoom (equivalent to a 28-300 zoom). But your best bet - in regards to sharpness and definition - is the older, yet awesome little Panasonic 14-45 OIS lens which only sells for around $260 USD (At B&H). I keep that particular Panny on my GF-1 most of the time, but with the likes of the E-PL5, I may switch it to there.

OK - but let's come back to the size. This was the most surprising thing for me. You see, I have other (earlier models) micro 4/3 bodies - those being: Panasonic GH-1 with a Panny 14-140 OIS lens (equivalent to a 28-280 zoom); the Panasonic GF-1 with the Panny 14-45 OIS lens; and the Olympus EP-2 with a Panny 20 MM f1.7 Lens (equivalent to a 40 MM lens). The E-PL5 was smaller than any of them and the kit lens is small, yet very nice.

So, what am I recommending here? Recommendations are a very subjective thing, that's for sure, and no two folks will agree. And equipment disagreements can often turn into shouting matches (which is ridiculous). I will say that if you like the prospect of a smaller interchangeable camera, then look no further than the 16 MP E-PL5. It has a superb color tonality, an excellent 16 MP sensor, superb high ISO capabilities (just about on par with most DSLR's), excellent ergonomics (well, that's subjective, I know), and is quality built. Additionally, there are quite a few folks who have a range of Fuji cameras, who have also adopted Micro 4/3 cameras.

So I would say that the E-PL5 is a wonderful addition. I don't think the X-20 (which I'm sure will be another superb model) is significantly better than the X-10 (other than the new OVF, which I think would be awesome).

Good luck with your choices....

--
Have a great one....
Bernd (Ben) W. Herrmann
North Carolina, USA
link

Thanks RMCN, I heard rumours about an upcoming 'professional' OM-D.

Another thing that has held me back from getting the OM-D so far is the thought of investing in yet another system (lemon collection), especially with the NEX disaster still rather fresh in my mind. Big plus for compact cameras here.

Thanks CA, I hoped someone would bring that up. I did a little homework here but have no practical experiences with any M43 lenses whatsoever. From what I've read I'd follow your recommendation, pass on the 12-60, get the Panny zoom instead and of course add the 20/1.7 and the 45/1.8 for the job. I also read good things about Oly's 14-54mm II/f2.8-3.5 and 12-60mm/f2.8-4, but these are monsters in comparison, I might as well return to Nikon DSLRs, . . . forbid

Is that because they are so similar?

Seriously ... if you think the X10 or X20 (same camera with slightly better IQ) are enough, then why consider blowing all that cash on the O-MD? And if you feel you need a MILC, then how does the X20 compete?

20+" prints from a 2/3" sensor ... perhaps in bright sunshine ...

The Pannies are very fast too ... despite the chorus of Oly fan boys' opinion.

Get the G3 or G5 depending on your budget. Still quite small and a real flippy LCD. Much more useful than just the one that moves up and down.

Oh well ... a JPEG shooter. Then you want Oly or Fuji ... unless of course you like accurate color. That would be Panasonic.

So money is no object. Then why are you not looking at the X100s? Or a Leica?

What does that even mean?

Lol ... because the 1" sensors cannot compete. Keep telling yourself that ...

No. You have it sussed.

Buy them all and use the ones you like.

--
http://kimletkeman.blogspot.com

Thanks for the response.  I have no experience with a great variety of camera's and have been shooting with a Olympus 8080wz since 2004.

My wife and I have been extremely pleased with it's JPEG output and print 16x20 with very minimal signs of jpeg which is saying something for an 8mp image.  I like the FUJI color very much, I always like our Olympus color rendering too.  That being said I use the camera jpeg quality widget here on DPR regularly (since we shoot jpeg only) and the only faults I have with my camera is that it is old and lacks any form of image stabilization and so does not do well indoors without a flash compared to the newer cameras that my family members use.  I don't recall seeing the X20 jpeg but the XZ-2 looks really clean. (although the OMD looks much better still)  I would call the two cameras a toss up and would even lean toward the X20 but I would like to try and move into RAW processing as our photography has improved so much over the last 12 years I would like to see if we can improve our images further.  (our first digital camera was purchased in 1999)

Because of the lack of stabilization and low light incapability on our 8080 (max ISO on our 8080 is 400 and it's pretty bad) I have been camera shopping for years and probably wasted years as you say reading and memorizing every specification.  It gets crazy.

I was just settled on the OMD EM 5 when my wife discovered that our beloved 8080 had been sitting out in the rain for 3 days.  I think it a victim of camera sharing, i.e. who has the camera?  So that has produced an immediate change of plans.  Besides the disadvantages of an old camera, (which does...opps I mean did) brilliantly in good light, we were getting tired of passing the camera between us to share the photo opportunities.  So now we are looking at possibly two cameras and then the difference I referenced in price in my first post becomes more of a factor.  Sorry but no OMD for me.

While selecting the OMD I also was extremely intrigued with the X100s which also looks like a perfect option for me.

I bought our 8080 on the recommendation of DPR (reviewed with a Gold in 2004) and I was perfectly satisfied.  Actually I could not imagine buying a camera which I had never held, but I did, and I was more than satisfied, it exceeded my expectations in all regards.  It has been so hard to pick a replacement that I could be confident that I would be pleased with.  Both the X20 and the ZX-2 appear to me to be vastly superior in all regards concerning image quality based on stabilization and sensor technology advancements!  I am excited.  The only other factor that has me leaning toward the XZ-2 is the newly implemented 5 way stabilization on the OLY.

I read this forum and space from before the HS10 came out, and almost purchased it.  Got cold feet at the last minute with all the debate it generated.

Sorry for being so long winded.  I sincerely hope you are happy with your choice.  None of the options you are looking at seem anything but splendid to me.

Regards,

Gary

--
Gary Leland

12-35 2.8 ... a fine lens by all accounts.

--
http://kimletkeman.blogspot.com

Thanks a lot Ben for your detailed reply !

I still have the E-PL5 on my list and next to the OM-D it's a darn tough call - compactness vs. built-in EVF (moving south) and 5-axis IBIS. The best option would be to have them both for a couple days but I don't want to misuse return policies, besides I'd order any OM from the U.S. anyway, they're far cheaper than over here in Europe.

Your recommendation for a standard zoom seconds CAcreeks choice and the results of my 'homework' (see above), good news ! Hopefully that lens performs better than Sony's hugely disappointing 1855 kit shard for their NEX system. If Sony had a decent standard zoom for their NEX line I wouldn't have ditched them, despite the numerous flaws, but I can't wait another year for the Zeiss. (Ironically the best perfoming lens for the NEXes by far is the $150 30mm/f2.8 Sigma, lol). I'm still steaming about it all.

Thanks again, Ben.

Anyone else mind to share his OM-D experiences ? Pros/cons compared to the X10/20 ?

Trust me that the m4/3 bodies and lenses are more compact. I just dumped my D7000 and a bunch of lenses for m4/3.

The 14-42 X VARIO PZ is an excellent lens and very compact, being a pancake. It would be my zoom of choice, except that I like the all in one concept and shoot the 14-140 G VARIO ... a very nice lens as well with good reach.

It really sounds like you don't know what you really want but "it's out there somewhere" ... I think the answer for you is to "keep buying and trying" until something sticks ...

--
http://kimletkeman.blogspot.com