Uh, the test image isn't shot at macro distance, so that's totally irrelevant. Keep trying though -- it's amusing.
-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
E-PL2 beats X100
- Thread starter LutherHeggs00
- Start date
It's nice to read someone who actually own both cameras.
Thanks for sharing your impressions, it may help some undecided peopole.
I agree totally : the E-PL1 and it's weak AA + the panny 20 f/1.7 is a hard to beat combo for IQ, even in the APS-C realm.
--
Cheers,
Frederic
http://azurphoto.com/blog/
Thanks for sharing your impressions, it may help some undecided peopole.
I agree totally : the E-PL1 and it's weak AA + the panny 20 f/1.7 is a hard to beat combo for IQ, even in the APS-C realm.
--
Cheers,
Frederic
http://azurphoto.com/blog/
Jogger
Veteran Member
wow. really?
you do realise that macro lenses are optimised for resolution? thats why they are use here in a resolution test (but apparently not for other systems). the x100 isnt a macro lens and shouldnt be compared to others in resolution tests..
actually, there is a perfectly serviceable 20/1.7 or 17/2.8 that they could have compared against
so, yea
you do realise that macro lenses are optimised for resolution? thats why they are use here in a resolution test (but apparently not for other systems). the x100 isnt a macro lens and shouldnt be compared to others in resolution tests..
actually, there is a perfectly serviceable 20/1.7 or 17/2.8 that they could have compared against
so, yea
Wow, I didn't realize that non-macro lenses were made to have poor resolution! LOL
That makes me glad I didn't buy a camera that has a fixed, low-resolution lens.
That makes me glad I didn't buy a camera that has a fixed, low-resolution lens.
FWIW, yes the X100 does have a APS-C sized sensor which should be meaningful when compared to a 4/3's sensor.
The X100 is not a f/3.5 lens, its a f/2.0 so I'm not sure if you're speaking hypothetically or you're trying to refer to the X100, which the OP is asking about.
Lastly, the X100 does have a built-in flash, so I'm not sure what your point is, other than it would appear that you are disagreeing with my comments, based on your inaccurate understanding of the X100 specs.
I guess its true, "Ignorance is Bliss", so do enjoy your blissful day.
--
Best,
Rob
------------------------------------
R3A M6-9 X100 GXR G2 DP2
tarnumf
Senior Member
I always thought that macro lens should be optimized for minimal distance...
Also, given that X100 is fixed lens camera, I would expect them to put best optics in there. Thus I see this test against one of the best lens to be completely fair.
Also, given that X100 is fixed lens camera, I would expect them to put best optics in there. Thus I see this test against one of the best lens to be completely fair.
tedolf
Forum Pro
papillon_65
Forum Pro
Yea, the Japanese army with only one weapon - scary lol.
That depends on the camera
.--
It's a known fact that where there's tea there's hope.
Tony
http://the-random-photographer.blogspot.com/
FlyPenFly
Senior Member
An EPL2 with the 50mm Olympus Macro lens looks stupid large and is completely impractical.
tarnumf
Senior Member
Same does the camera with fixed (and not so perfect) lens for $1000+ to me.
But people who own either X100 or Zuiko 50mm will disagree with us
http://budeny.zenfolio.com/
But people who own either X100 or Zuiko 50mm will disagree with us
--
http://budeny.zenfolio.com/
FlyPenFly
Senior Member
How much is an EPL2 + VF2 + F2 or faster prime?
How big is that?
Is it made out of metal or chintzy plastic? (check out a Nikon if you want to know what quality plastic feels like)
Does it have an electronic overlay viewfinder?
Don't get me wrong, the EPL2 is a great priced camera kit and I've recommended it to others even after the X100 release because for the price, it can't be beat and the kit lens is very good.
X100 is a whole different class of camera in both IQ and size. The EPL3 if it uses the new G3 sensor might come close but even then, the high ISO and especially the dynamic range is quite limited. The EPL2 doesn't stand a chance.
How big is that?
Is it made out of metal or chintzy plastic? (check out a Nikon if you want to know what quality plastic feels like)
Does it have an electronic overlay viewfinder?
Don't get me wrong, the EPL2 is a great priced camera kit and I've recommended it to others even after the X100 release because for the price, it can't be beat and the kit lens is very good.
X100 is a whole different class of camera in both IQ and size. The EPL3 if it uses the new G3 sensor might come close but even then, the high ISO and especially the dynamic range is quite limited. The EPL2 doesn't stand a chance.
I don't get why everything is always so black or white. Why can't someone have an X100, and use it for what it does best, and still use m4/3 or NEX or a DSLR as well ??
I've got a wide range of cameras and they are all suited better or worse for a given task.
GH2 with a 14-140 or 100-300 is simply fantastic for getting a wide range or long reach in a very compact yet high quality system
X100 with its classic design, classic focal length, optical viewfinder and high iso ability is awesome for street shooting.
Its limited in what it can do, but so what ??? Why does it have to do everything ? Who says it has to be your only camera ?? Who says its supposed to appeal to everyone ?
Its a niche photographic tool for those who enjoy that style of shooting.
Its like owning a classic car. They are overpriced, not very versatile and make far less sense than most any modern car but they are still fun to take out on the weekends
X100 brings shooting enjoyment that not many modern cameras give. Many are probably too young to even remember cameras like that but for those who enjoy them, its totally money well spent
--
http://www.millsartphotography.com
I've got a wide range of cameras and they are all suited better or worse for a given task.
GH2 with a 14-140 or 100-300 is simply fantastic for getting a wide range or long reach in a very compact yet high quality system
X100 with its classic design, classic focal length, optical viewfinder and high iso ability is awesome for street shooting.
Its limited in what it can do, but so what ??? Why does it have to do everything ? Who says it has to be your only camera ?? Who says its supposed to appeal to everyone ?
Its a niche photographic tool for those who enjoy that style of shooting.
Its like owning a classic car. They are overpriced, not very versatile and make far less sense than most any modern car but they are still fun to take out on the weekends
X100 brings shooting enjoyment that not many modern cameras give. Many are probably too young to even remember cameras like that but for those who enjoy them, its totally money well spent
--
http://www.millsartphotography.com
tarnumf
Senior Member
$400+$220+$320 = $940
And VF2 looks better to me than X100 viewfinder.
As big as I want - you can remove VF2 if it not needed.
I don't care about metal body that much. Nowadays non-pro cameras are outdated in 3 years completely.
VF2 is completely electronic, you see exactly same info as on LCD, not sure why you refer to overlay here.
X100 is class of itself - in other words it's niche camera. Same as Leica's X1. PEN and Lumix on other hand are entry level systems. So far, I haven't seen X100 making better shots than m43 system - and that is really disappointing, I was really expecting lens to be top of the best. And where X100 really doesn't have a chance is lens focal distance. Sure you can make nice pics with it, but 35mm won't transform into macro, tele, UWA or any other lens.
http://budeny.zenfolio.com/
And VF2 looks better to me than X100 viewfinder.
As big as I want - you can remove VF2 if it not needed.
I don't care about metal body that much. Nowadays non-pro cameras are outdated in 3 years completely.
VF2 is completely electronic, you see exactly same info as on LCD, not sure why you refer to overlay here.
X100 is class of itself - in other words it's niche camera. Same as Leica's X1. PEN and Lumix on other hand are entry level systems. So far, I haven't seen X100 making better shots than m43 system - and that is really disappointing, I was really expecting lens to be top of the best. And where X100 really doesn't have a chance is lens focal distance. Sure you can make nice pics with it, but 35mm won't transform into macro, tele, UWA or any other lens.
--
http://budeny.zenfolio.com/
FlyPenFly
Senior Member
I've had both, X100 EVF is much better.
The framing of the optical finder on the X100 beats out EVF because you can see with your eyeballs like a real DSLR viewfinder the scene as well as seeing the framing. It gives you the Rangefinder advantage of seeing what's going on around your capture area.
Sorry, if you can't see how the X100 is taking better cleaner photos with much higher dynamic range, I can't help you.
I've owned the E-P1, E-P2, E-PL2, GF-1, and G-1 so I have A LOT of experience shooting Microfourthirds. The difference is very apparent to me.
The framing of the optical finder on the X100 beats out EVF because you can see with your eyeballs like a real DSLR viewfinder the scene as well as seeing the framing. It gives you the Rangefinder advantage of seeing what's going on around your capture area.
Sorry, if you can't see how the X100 is taking better cleaner photos with much higher dynamic range, I can't help you.
I've owned the E-P1, E-P2, E-PL2, GF-1, and G-1 so I have A LOT of experience shooting Microfourthirds. The difference is very apparent to me.
tarnumf
Senior Member
That's good, so use it. I like VF2 and will use it.
That is quite little advantage if any. Live View in viewfinder quite overcomes it - for me at least.
I'm not in doubt that it's apparent to you. All I'm saying that so far it hadn't show up in any test shots - DPR or else. Wait.. there IS the difference, but not in favor of X100.
--
http://budeny.zenfolio.com/
I don't have a dog in this fight, but I would suggest comparing the JPEG sizes. The Oly ones are two-thirds bigger, suggesting that the X100 images from a bigger sensor have been squashed down quite a bit more with resultant quality loss.
So I would suggest that a real comparison should be between RAW files.
Having said that, I am attracted to the notion of the first respondent's E-P1 with the 17 (or Panny 14) lens and matching accessory viewfinder. Very expensive, though. I wouldn't give you tuppence for the E-P1 without an accessory viewfinder; its LCD isn't up to much.
Cheers, geoff
--
Geoffrey Heard
http://pngtimetraveller.blogspot.com/2010/12/what-does-standard-of-living-mean-in.html
So I would suggest that a real comparison should be between RAW files.
Having said that, I am attracted to the notion of the first respondent's E-P1 with the 17 (or Panny 14) lens and matching accessory viewfinder. Very expensive, though. I wouldn't give you tuppence for the E-P1 without an accessory viewfinder; its LCD isn't up to much.
Cheers, geoff
--
Geoffrey Heard
http://pngtimetraveller.blogspot.com/2010/12/what-does-standard-of-living-mean-in.html
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum