Leaving DSLR - pros and cons of X-E1 vs OM-D EM-5

Started Mar 17, 2013 | Discussions
pavinder
Regular MemberPosts: 213
Like?
Re: Had the EM5, now have the XP1
In reply to photo chris, Mar 18, 2013

Incredibly helpful post, Photo Chris.

Especially with all the lens examples you give - really appreciated.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Tapper123
Senior MemberPosts: 1,172Gear list
Like?
Re: Leaving DSLR - pros and cons of X-E1 vs OM-D EM-5
In reply to pavinder, Mar 18, 2013

pavinder wrote:

Would really appreciate some advice on what is becoming an incredibly frustrating decision.
I currently have an EOS 20D and a ton of lenses, but have hardly used it in years - due mainly to
a) the weight and bulk, and
b) the crop factor.
I considered a 5D or 6D for a long time because of the full frame sensor, but realized that it would make issue b) even worse. I'm therefore absolutely convinced I should sell my Canon gear and am now looking at these mirrorless systems.
I've been deliberating over the choice of the OM-D E-M5 vs. X-E1 for ages. I see strong arguments for and against both cameras/systems on these forums.
Here are what I'm coming up against as my main pros and cons of each:
X-E1 Pros:
. Great image quality, large sensor, the "creamy film-like feel" of the images.
. Low light performance (but given the low-light focussing issues, does this detract?)
X-E1 Cons:
. No environmental sealing,
. The fully "old school" controls (having to manually turn the aperture ring on the lens barrel and the click dial for shutter speed). I find it a little cumbersome.
. No in-body IS, only in some lenses
. Very limited video options (no shutter speed setting etc)
. Lack of filters and effects (this is less important)

OM-D E-M5 Pros:
. Environmental sealing,
. In-body IS,
. Easy access to dials and other adjustments with one finger while using viewfinder (i.e. good ergonomics)
. Highly customizable including menus/dials,
. Wider range of lenses (although many aren't of high quality)
. Slightly more video options (over the X-E1, although still not really great)
. "Live Time" function (I do a lot of low light photography and long exposures)
OM-D E-M5 Cons:
. Lower IQ and smaller sensor than X-E1
. More noise in low-light shots
. Video limitations (no 24fps option for example)
With regard to my shooting preferences, I have 2 main areas:
1. A lot of low-light and night photography using long exposures.

As well as urban street scenes (dark alleyways etc.) I often shoot bulb exposures of a few minutes or more in forests or mountains at night, using ambient light only.
The X-E1 seems to have less noise and better low light performance, but I wonder if the IS of the OM-D can balance the equation.
To be honest I rarely shoot above 400 ISO anyway - I don't need to get sharper shots at 12,800 to freeze motion for example. I'd rather use a longer exposure at lower ISO.
In this regard, the OM-D's Live Time function looks quite brilliant.
2. Shallow DOF shots with soft bokeh. Including night shots.
The X-E1seems far better based on samples I've seen. I've not seen a single sample from the OM-D with very narrow DOF and beautiful bokeh.
But perhaps this could be compensated by the choice of lens on the OM-D?
Any comments from photographers on the above points would be gratefully appreciated.

I own an OMD and a NEX. But based upon your described preferences, sounds like the XE1 may be a good choice. BUT be sure you're OK with its relative limitations. I think OMD is a great all-arounder. Personally I bought it because of the MFT lens selection and the weather sealing, especially the weather sealed 60mm Macro since I love nature macros.

Try to test one in person if possible.

 Tapper123's gear list:Tapper123's gear list
Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX100 III Sony Alpha NEX-F3 +2 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
pavinder
Regular MemberPosts: 213
Like?
Re: Leaving DSLR - pros and cons of X-E1 vs OM-D EM-5
In reply to Daniel Lauring, Mar 18, 2013

Daniel Lauring wrote:

I have both and if I could only choose one, it would be the OMD.

1. ..

11.

Thanks Daniel, some very useful points.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
pavinder
Regular MemberPosts: 213
Like?
Re: Leaving DSLR - pros and cons of X-E1 vs OM-D EM-5
In reply to Tapper123, Mar 18, 2013

Tapper123 wrote:

I own an OMD and a NEX. But based upon your described preferences, sounds like the XE1 may be a good choice. BUT be sure you're OK with its relative limitations. I think OMD is a great all-arounder. Personally I bought it because of the MFT lens selection and the weather sealing, especially the weather sealed 60mm Macro since I love nature macros.

Try to test one in person if possible.

I too really appreciate environmental sealing. I just wrote that I'm now tending towards the OM-D due to it's overall functionality despite slightly lower IQ.

Testing is difficult.  I can handle both cameras in-store (and have many times), prefer the OM-D's customizability and faster DSLR-style controls.  But what would be best is to be able to test them somewhere with shadows, dynamic range, soft forms, natural colours - not the clinical, hard-edged fluorescent-bulb uniformity of a store!

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
jks33
Junior MemberPosts: 31
Like?
Re: Leaving DSLR - pros and cons of X-E1 vs OM-D EM-5
In reply to pavinder, Mar 18, 2013

I have an OM-D and also had the XE-1. Go Oly. The struggles the XE-1 has in low light focusing is ironic since it is a low light IQ star. Sounds like you do a lot of tripod shooting for long exposure. The flip screen is SO nice for tripod work. Also the OM-D has the live view long exposure feature. I had not used it but reportedly it works well.

I am still a a of the X series, and have a X100S on preorder, I loved my X100, but soId it for the S.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
sgoldswo
Senior MemberPosts: 3,640Gear list
Like?
Re: Some clarifications
In reply to photo chris, Mar 18, 2013

photo chris wrote:

The EM5 is a fantastic camera, fast focusing, IBIS is better than any lens based system IMHO and IQ is really good and its weather sealed with certain lenses. But its a small camera and even with the grip, the buttons are still very small - something I didn't like. The Fuji is much cleaner at high ISO's. If you do long exposures the "live bulb" mode on the EM5 is awesome - you can see the images as they're exposed on the LCD and stop the exposure when its properly exposed. A lot of the EM5's functions are buried in some very poorly organized menus and for me the buttons were just too small. If Olympus brings some of its faster 43 lenses to M43 and the rumored "pro" OMD I may reconsider, but for now its a great camera with cumbersome controls and menu's. Video on the EM5 is really, really good. I tested it against the Sony a99 and the Nex5n and the EM5 was far better than the a99 - the Nex5n was the best of the 3. You are limited to 30p, but its very, very good.

The Fuji has all the major controls right on the camera and pretty much everything needed while shooting can be accessed through the Q menu. Aperture is a snap to adjust as you hold the camera by the lens anyway, so your left hand is always on aperture controls. Shutter and exposure compensation cal easily be adjusted without moving the camera from your eye. AF point is so easy to move, you can quickly place it on your subject and skip focus/recompose. I read a lot of gripes about Fuji's AF speed and that made me nervous before the switch, but I haven't seen a dramatic difference in AF speed with the 18, 35 and 18-55mm lenses and the legendary Olympus 45/1.8. I use the 'mash the shutter' technique that's been discussed and it works really well. Video on the Fuji's is terrible since you can't adjust exposure, so its constantly changing from light to dark depending on whatever the meter focuses on. I'll never fully commit to X mount until Fuji gives its cameras the simple capability to lock shutter speed, aperture and ISO while shooting video since I shoot a lot of video.

The larger sensor gets you one stop better DOF for equivalent apertures and there are very few large aperture AF lenses in M43 world. The 25/1.4 is awesome, but its FOV/DOF is only 50/2.8 in FF terms. The M43 zooms are good, but no great. The Panny 12-35/2.8 has the DOF of a 5.6 lens on FF, not exactly great for $1300 if bokeh and shallow DOF is your thing. The X 35/1.4 is a stunner and the upcoming 23/1.4 and 56/1.4 will have no equal in M43 land.

For me the controls on the EM5 were just too small and the menus are just bang your head against the wall stupid. The Fuji is definitely a better shooting experience IMHO and IQ is better as well. ISO 3200 is just so clean, far more so than the EM5 and LR 4.4 really does a nice job with the raw conversion. Of course the Fuji jpeg's are fantastic, I've used it for portrait shoots along side my 5d3 and delivered jpeg's to paying customers. With the improvements made to the X100s and the new Zeiss lenses, the future looks bright for the X system, just add manual controls to video to the Xpro2/1s or whatever its going to be called and I'll sell my 5d3 and carry two of the new X bodies.

Agreed largely, but it would be fairer to point in terms of equivalence to that applicable to the XF lenses as well (e.g. the F1.4 35 is something like a F2.1 on FF from a DOF point of view). I strongly disagree on the two Panny zooms (which I own and are both great) but the 12-35 isn't perfect on the  E_m5 due to bad CA.

 sgoldswo's gear list:sgoldswo's gear list
Leica M Typ 240 Olympus E-M1 Nikon Df Nikon D810
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
sgoldswo
Senior MemberPosts: 3,640Gear list
Like?
Re: Some thoughts from an owner of both
In reply to pavinder, Mar 18, 2013

I should point out here that I own a ton of cameras - an X-Pro1, X-E1, E-M5 and GH3 amongst others. Personally I would take the X-E1 over the E-M5 but it's a far tougher comparison if you bring the GH3 into the fray (IMO it's a better camera than the E-M5).

pavinder wrote:

Would really appreciate some advice on what is becoming an incredibly frustrating decision.
I currently have an EOS 20D and a ton of lenses, but have hardly used it in years - due mainly to
a) the weight and bulk, and
b) the crop factor.
I considered a 5D or 6D for a long time because of the full frame sensor, but realized that it would make issue b) even worse. I'm therefore absolutely convinced I should sell my Canon gear and am now looking at these mirrorless systems.
I've been deliberating over the choice of the OM-D E-M5 vs. X-E1 for ages. I see strong arguments for and against both cameras/systems on these forums.
Here are what I'm coming up against as my main pros and cons of each:
X-E1 Pros:
. Great image quality, large sensor, the "creamy film-like feel" of the images.
. Low light performance (but given the low-light focussing issues, does this detract?)
X-E1 Cons:
. No environmental sealing,
. The fully "old school" controls (having to manually turn the aperture ring on the lens barrel and the click dial for shutter speed). I find it a little cumbersome.

The old school controls are a lot quicker and more intuitive to use. There is a reason why Leica retained them. This is genuinely a plus and if you don't think so you haven't had enough time with the camera yet.

. No in-body IS, only in some lenses

IS is really overrated. I didn't realise that until I bought my GH3 (and I could compare apples with apples). The situation where its really useful is in social stuff. Otherwise just keep your shutter speed high or use a tripod or other support.

. Very limited video options (no shutter speed setting etc)

Agree on this but I don't think video on the E-M5 is all that either. It's one reason why I spend a lot more time with the GH3 these days.

. Lack of filters and effects (this is less important)

OM-D E-M5 Pros:
. Environmental sealing,
. In-body IS,
. Easy access to dials and other adjustments with one finger while using viewfinder (i.e. good ergonomics)

The E-M5 has really bad ergonomics. It can be a pain to use for long periods and the HLD-6 grip isn't that great if you have even medium sized hands - I found the E-M5 uncomfortable to shoot with the Panny 35-100mm mounted which isn't a huge lens. See my observations above. The GH3 on the other hand has magnificent ergonomics. It may not have dials but it has a button for everything in the style of a FF DSLR.

. Highly customizable including menus/dials,
. Wider range of lenses (although many aren't of high quality)
. Slightly more video options (over the X-E1, although still not really great)

Agreed, the GH3 is far superior in this area.

. "Live Time" function (I do a lot of low light photography and long exposures)
OM-D E-M5 Cons:
. Lower IQ and smaller sensor than X-E1
. More noise in low-light shots
. Video limitations (no 24fps option for example)
With regard to my shooting preferences, I have 2 main areas:
1. A lot of low-light and night photography using long exposures.

As well as urban street scenes (dark alleyways etc.) I often shoot bulb exposures of a few minutes or more in forests or mountains at night, using ambient light only.
The X-E1 seems to have less noise and better low light performance, but I wonder if the IS of the OM-D can balance the equation.

No, you can't hand hold those kind of exposures unless you are carved from something. For those kind of shots you need a tripod. Honestly though, even at base ISO there is a little something extra from the Fuji sensor. It comes down to more natural colour transitions (which look great on skies and skin). Paired with the stunning lenses available for the Fuji the IQ can be very, very impressive.

To be honest I rarely shoot above 400 ISO anyway - I don't need to get sharper shots at 12,800 to freeze motion for example. I'd rather use a longer exposure at lower ISO.
In this regard, the OM-D's Live Time function looks quite brilliant.
2. Shallow DOF shots with soft bokeh. Including night shots.
The X-E1seems far better based on samples I've seen. I've not seen a single sample from the OM-D with very narrow DOF and beautiful bokeh.
But perhaps this could be compensated by the choice of lens on the OM-D?

You are looking at longer and faster lenses for the E-M5 or getting closer to your subject. That said, the Voigtlander 17.5mm F0.95 produces wonderful creamy bokeh (but is very large, heavy and MF).

Any comments from photographers on the above points would be gratefully appreciated.

For stills I would get the X-E1, for video the GH3. I wouldn't get the E_M5 now (but it's handy as a second body).

 sgoldswo's gear list:sgoldswo's gear list
Leica M Typ 240 Olympus E-M1 Nikon Df Nikon D810
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
pavinder
Regular MemberPosts: 213
Like?
Re: Some thoughts from an owner of both
In reply to sgoldswo, Mar 18, 2013

sgoldswo wrote:

Personally I would take the X-E1 over the E-M5 but it's a far tougher comparison if you bring the GH3 into the fray (IMO it's a better camera than the E-M5).

The old school controls are a lot quicker and more intuitive to use. There is a reason why Leica retained them. This is genuinely a plus and if you don't think so you haven't had enough time with the camera yet.

Since the mid '70s I've used old school controls, but with digital technology has come far more shooting parameters, screen display options, etc.  I've become used to quick and easy access to such things, and personally find the X-E1 limited here.  I realize this is purely personal preference though.

IS is really overrated. I didn't realise that until I bought my GH3 (and I could compare apples with apples). The situation where its really useful is in social stuff. Otherwise just keep your shutter speed high or use a tripod or other support.

Good point, it's mainly in low-light handheld situations (or extreme telephoto which I rarely use) that IS seems critical.

I don't think video on the E-M5 is all that either. It's one reason why I spend a lot more time with the GH3 these days.

Understood.  If it weren't for the GH3's size/form, I'd definitely be considering it.

The E-M5 has really bad ergonomics. ... The GH3 on the other hand has magnificent ergonomics. It may not have dials but it has a button for everything in the style of a FF DSLR.

I think this really is a case of personal preference.  I find the E-M5 very straightforward and ergonomic, although as I haven't spent much time with the GH3 I can't compare the two.

even at base ISO there is a little something extra from the Fuji sensor. It comes down to more natural colour transitions (which look great on skies and skin). Paired with the stunning lenses available for the Fuji the IQ can be very, very impressive.

This is exactly my main concern - will I feel disappointed with the E-M5 images whenever I see Fuji shots?

I'm hoping that a little post-processing might go some way towards bridging any difference in colour balance, tonal transitions, etc.

the Voigtlander 17.5mm F0.95 produces wonderful creamy bokeh (but is very large, heavy and MF).

I'll definitely look into this one - thanks.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
photo perzon
Senior MemberPosts: 3,679Gear list
Like?
Less IQ. The one thing that matters.
In reply to pavinder, Mar 18, 2013

Less IQ.  The one thing that matters.

 photo perzon's gear list:photo perzon's gear list
Canon PowerShot S120 Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX100 III Ricoh GXR A16 24-85mm F3.5-5.5 Olympus PEN E-PL5 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GM1
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Daniel Lauring
Veteran MemberPosts: 7,704Gear list
Like?
Re: Some thoughts from an owner of both
In reply to pavinder, Mar 18, 2013

pavinder wrote:

even at base ISO there is a little something extra from the Fuji sensor. It comes down to more natural colour transitions (which look great on skies and skin). Paired with the stunning lenses available for the Fuji the IQ can be very, very impressive.

This is exactly my main concern - will I feel disappointed with the E-M5 images whenever I see Fuji shots?

I'm hoping that a little post-processing might go some way towards bridging any difference in colour balance, tonal transitions, etc.

I don't see it. In fact, there is less and less difference between a decent point and shoot, and a full frame camera, at lower ISO's. You need to get into regions of large dynamic range before you see it.

This weekend, I accidentally underexposed an X-E1 shoot, at a studio workshop. There was definitely NOT the same ability to pull the shadows that there is with the D600 or D800. They weren't crazy noisy, but they didn't have the color I see with the Nikons's Sony sensor.

 Daniel Lauring's gear list:Daniel Lauring's gear list
Fujifilm XF 55-200mm F3.5-4.8 R LM OIS
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Timur Born
Senior MemberPosts: 4,000
Like?
Re: Some thoughts from an owner of both
In reply to pavinder, Mar 18, 2013

Much of the "ergonomics" question comes down to how you are used to hold your cameras. The DSRL style cameras with pronounced grip need you to lift your elbows and arms in order to keep the wrist at a comfortable angle, in return to get a firmer hold. The Rangefinder style cameras with less pronounced grip need you to keep your elbows and arms closer to the body in order to keep the wrist at a comfortable angle, in return for a more casual hold.

I usually prefer the latter, because my wrist and arms feel more comfortable with the casual hold. It's also less intimidating for people when you photograph them with your arms down.

When I try to hold a DSLR/pronounced grip camera with arms down for more than 15 minutes my wrist starts to hurt from the awkward angle.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
damoclesnz
Regular MemberPosts: 408Gear list
Like?
Re: Less IQ. The one thing that matters.
In reply to photo perzon, Mar 18, 2013

Is it the only thing that matters though? Handling and performance have to count for something

 damoclesnz's gear list:damoclesnz's gear list
Fujifilm X-Pro1 Canon EOS 6D
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
57even
Senior MemberPosts: 6,111Gear list
Like?
Handling and IQ vs speed and features
In reply to pavinder, Mar 18, 2013

I don't use video and very rarely shoot fast action, so for me the IQ benefit and external controls on the Fuji series are tops. IQ is not just related to the sensor but the lenses as well, in combination they can produce excellent subject isolation, contrast and colour.

The external controls (and relatively few buttons) also means I can just about handle the Xe1 with my largish hands without hitting the wrong button. Anything smaller (and I've tried) just doesn't work for me.

The large screen and packed rear deck of the OMD meant I was constantly pressing the wrong button on the controller, and none of them had a "positive click" to tell me I had pressed them. The menus are also confusing but sadly necessary because the camera really wasn't set up well by default. You really need to spend a while customising the controls.

And although on paper, the new 16MP MFT sensor is really good, it just cant come close to the subject separation I seem to get with the Fuji, possibly not just because of DOF but also bokeh quality. Good lenses (and there are a few peaches for MFT) are pretty expensive too.

The OMD is a better all round camera, if you want a proper flash system, long lenses, in body IS and tons of customisation, it will do more jobs and do them all well, as long as you can stand the handling. But personally I find the GH3 much easier to use and it kills everything else out there for video (Sony included). It also has a good sensor and all the same lens choices.

So if I wanted an all rounder I would get a GH3 (or possibly a NEX7, though still not big on Sony lenses) but for a pure stills system with wonderful handling, the Fuji is really a poor boy's Leica.

 57even's gear list:57even's gear list
Fujifilm X-Pro1 Nikon D800 Fujifilm X-E1
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
photo chris
Regular MemberPosts: 281
Like?
Re: Some clarifications
In reply to sgoldswo, Mar 18, 2013

sgoldswo wrote:

Agreed largely, but it would be fairer to point in terms of equivalence to that applicable to the XF lenses as well (e.g. the F1.4 35 is something like a F2.1 on FF from a DOF point of view). I strongly disagree on the two Panny zooms (which I own and are both great) but the 12-35 isn't perfect on the E_m5 due to bad CA.

Yes, I forgot to mention the FF terms with the Fuji lenses, but it still allows for shallower DOF compared to M43 AF offerings.  After using them, I'll take the X 14/2.8 over the Oly 12/2, the 35/1.4 over the Panny 25/1.4 and the 18-55 over the Panny 12-35 - and when the 23/1.4 and 56/1.4 drop, they will offer superior light gathering and DOF compared to any equivalent AF lens in M43.

The OP said shallow DOF and long exposures were a high priority so that's where I was coming from, the incredibly clean files Fuji renders and the shallower DOF you can get with native AF lenses.  I wasn't impressed with the 12-35 for the money - its a good lens, but IMO not worth ~$1200 when I just paid $650 for a new Canon 24-105L that's every bit as good.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
3systermuser
Contributing MemberPosts: 972
Like?
Re: Leaving DSLR - pros and cons of X-E1 vs OM-D EM-5
In reply to pavinder, Mar 19, 2013

well, good try , but onething I must disagree here is the DOF issue.

the fastest prime that the Fuji has right now is just f1.4 , while the OM-D has f0.95 primes, so there is no DOF issue with the Oly.

and many many wideopen freaks say shallow DOF is better but in many cases in real life naturally deeper DOF of the OM-D makes it better for street or product shooting.

for example , if Fuji needs f2 , 1/30th at ISO800 to get decent DOF , Oly only needs f1.4, 1/60th at ISO400 to get identically good DOF, plus Oly has 5 stop-IS , so actually in real life handheld photography , the OM-D is better even in IQ.

and Oly has 2 great Panasonic constant f2.8 zooms , Fuji has nothing similar to the 35-100f2.8 or 12-35mm OIS.

plus the OM-D has much better video mode than the crappy video of the Fuji.

so for me RX1(or X100s)+ OMD + Nikon D800 make the best kit.

now I am debating the X100s vs the RX1 and I think the X100s is a great cam but the X-E1 has too many minor issues and its poor lens selection makes it out of my interest.

but honestly I think APS-C is now doomed , most of us who really care about image quality go FF or FX and when we shoot candid or street , I think there is no better camera than the RX1 or the OM-D.

-- hide signature --

derek.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
3systermuser
Contributing MemberPosts: 972
Like?
Re: Handling and IQ vs speed and features
In reply to 57even, Mar 19, 2013

funny Fuji , the practical real life IQ of the Fuji is not any better than that of the OM-D based system.

IQ should be evaluated as a whole system and MFT has much better selection of better primes , thus the OM-D system might win over the Fuji based system in many FLs.

and do not forget slow and inaccurate aF of the X-E1 makes its PRACTICAL real life IQ can be worse.

and to get the same DOF at the same shutter speed , Fuji has to to crank up ISO or OM-D gets faster SS, so naturally deeper DOF at aperture to aperture of the OM-D can be good.

-- hide signature --

derek.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
sgoldswo
Senior MemberPosts: 3,640Gear list
Like?
Re: Handling and IQ vs speed and features
In reply to 3systermuser, Mar 19, 2013

3systermuser wrote:

funny Fuji , the practical real life IQ of the Fuji is not any better than that of the OM-D based system.

I own both - the Fuji IQ is better. It's not that difficult to see even on web sized pictures. It doesn't mean the E-M5 is terrible but you do get that bit extra from the Fuji.

IQ should be evaluated as a whole system and MFT has much better selection of better primes , thus the OM-D system might win over the Fuji based system in many FLs.

Agreed - but not in the FLs that are covered. The 14, 35 and 18-55 are arguably superior to their M43s (rough) equivalents.

and do not forget slow and inaccurate aF of the X-E1 makes its PRACTICAL real life IQ can be worse.

Not really - it isn't that slow anymore. You just adapt your shooting style.

and to get the same DOF at the same shutter speed , Fuji has to to crank up ISO or OM-D gets faster SS, so naturally deeper DOF at aperture to aperture of the OM-D can be good.

But it isn't really a problem to crank up ISO on the Fuji cameras, at all. I don't think it's harder to get DOF on the Fuji if that's what you are trying to say.

-- hide signature --

derek.

 sgoldswo's gear list:sgoldswo's gear list
Leica M Typ 240 Olympus E-M1 Nikon Df Nikon D810
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
itairom
Regular MemberPosts: 430
Like?
Re: Leaving DSLR - pros and cons of X-E1 vs OM-D EM-5
In reply to pavinder, Mar 19, 2013

I don't think the IQ differences at low ISO will be hugely significant. The Fuji's main appeal is its control scheme and high ISO image quality. All else being equal you'll also have more depth of field control with the Fuji due to the larger sensor. But it's not a huge difference. The OM-D will provide IBIS and faster AF. Both cameras have great jpeg engines. The Fuji overall is quirkier in operation while the Olympus covers every need pretty well, though at times is hampered in the usability department (eg small buttons, long menus).

Personally, I can't really understand buying the Fuji if you don't care for the control scheme. That seems like such an integral part of the camera's appeal to me.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
itairom
Regular MemberPosts: 430
Like?
Re: Leaving DSLR - pros and cons of X-E1 vs OM-D EM-5
In reply to 3systermuser, Mar 19, 2013

the fastest prime that the Fuji has right now is just f1.4 , while the OM-D has f0.95 primes, so there is no DOF issue with the Oly.

That's great with the caveat that you have to be happy with MF, and fairly expensive primes as well.

for example , if Fuji needs f2 , 1/30th at ISO800 to get decent DOF , Oly only needs f1.4, 1/60th at ISO400 to get identically good DOF, plus Oly has 5 stop-IS , so actually in real life handheld photography , the OM-D is better even in IQ.

First, I'm not sure the math is right – Fuji wouldn't need both a slower shutter and higher ISO, just one of the two.

Second, you're assuming that you have a f/1.4 lens for the Oly. There aren't many of those. Also, IBIS is not useful for every subject. IBIS is a great feature, but if the OP is shooting long exposures on a tripod then it's completely meaningless in this decision.

and Oly has 2 great Panasonic constant f2.8 zooms , Fuji has nothing similar to the 35-100f2.8 or 12-35mm OIS.

They are nice, but I think these lenses are way too expensive for what they offer. There are some prices I'm not willing to pay, personally. Fuji's kit lens is quite good and a lot cheaper, particularly in a kit with the X-E1. Also there's a telephoto zoom coming, plus some interesting Zeiss primes that will not be available for m4/3. By the end of this year, Fuji is slated to offer a fairly thorough lens selection.

but honestly I think APS-C is now doomed , most of us who really care about image quality go FF or FX and when we shoot candid or street , I think there is no better camera than the RX1 or the OM-D.

One could just as easily say that APS-C offers the best value for the money and compromise between size and image quality. In my opinion, the biggest issue with APS-C in the past was that the DSLR manufacturers failed to fulfill the promise of smaller cameras with smaller lenses. Fuji, and Sony at a much slower pace, are showing that it's perfectly feasible to build appealing camera systems around APS-C.

All of that said, I do think the OP sounds like more of an OM-D candidate.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
AB8ND
Regular MemberPosts: 108Gear list
Like?
Re: Leaving DSLR - pros and cons of X-E1 vs OM-D EM-5
In reply to pavinder, Mar 19, 2013

How are the Old School controls a con? Besides making operation faster than flipping through menus they are part if the charm of the camera.

Jack

 AB8ND's gear list:AB8ND's gear list
Fujifilm X100S Canon EOS 30D Fujifilm X-E1 Canon EOS 6D Fujifilm XF 35mm F1.4 R +4 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads