XZ-1 compared to, say, an E-P1 or E-P2

Maybe not the fairest of comparisons, but I'm looking for a small, not necessarily "pocketable" camera to carry instead of one of my Nikon DSLRs.

The market is pretty saturated for a "smaller" camera. I know the XZ-1 has that great fast lens, but others might make up the difference with cleaner higher ISO capability. I"m not concerned with bokeh, just useability/ergonomics/IQ/fun factor. The XZ-1 already has a lens cap so that comparison is apples to apples.

Just wondering if someone here who owns both could compare. Thanks.

I can't comment on the EP series but I do own a XZ1 and I carry it around with me even when walking the dog and for those times when I leave the bulky Nikon D300s at home.

It is a fun and excellent camera that takes great shots.

I ended up buying the optional viewfinder as the screen as in all P&S is useless in sunlight.

With the viewfinder fitted the camera is a bit more bulky but still light that you don't know you are carrying it.

Sometimes the focus struggles to lock in bright light on the beach, but that is my only gripe.

My fiirst digital camera in 2000 was an Olympus C3030Z so in a way I've come home.

The art filters are fun to use

There is a dedicated Flickr group and I have some pictures taken with THE XZ1 posted there.

I purchased the camera for its small size but with the EVF fitted I am carrying it around in a KATA bag dedicated to the NEX range so go figure.

I have the third party grip attached and auto lens cover, which makes things even better.

I would love a leather ever ready case that would hold the XZ1 with EVF permanently attached. But alas I haven't find one so far.

I noticed a post on this forum just now with Edgewater beach shots taken with a PEN, they look excellent.

Link to my flickr XZ1 set

http://www.flickr.com/photos/pomgonewalkabout/sets/72157628585137575/

--

http://www.pomgonewalkabout.com

And loads of other cameras.

The XZ1 has two things going for it - fun factor and IQ. It's a fun camera because it isn't particularly feature rich, certainly not like most Olympus cameras and not in comparison with Panasonic LX5, e.g. But what it has, works extremely well without having to fuss about. I use it as a p&s, shooting raw in P mode. I also use the VF2, which really elevates the usability of the camera, but does add to the expense and size. Also, using the VF2 means taking along spare batteries, but the batteries are small and cheap.

As for IQ, it is really good. The lens is very sharp and well made, and its qualities show up in images. Except for the recent excellent primes for m4/3, I'd say that actual IQ is better for this camera than EP2 simply because the lens is better than most m4/3 lenses.

However, the XZ1 is a small sensor camera and there are limitations compared to EP2. DR is smaller and file quality is lessor. That isn't an issue in good light unless you like to do a lot of post processing. Bigger files always handle more post processing better than smaller files will. In low light, EP2 will do better, even considering the speed of the XZ1 lens.

EP2 is more like DSLR in that it has more overall capability but requires more fuss - buying lenses, e.g. I really like my EP2, but I see it as a substitute for DSLR, not a competitor for XZ1, which is a digicam. To me, they are just different categories.

So really the decision is yours and up to your priorities. If you want least amount of fuss and most convenience, get the XZ1. If you like extensive processing or want camera more like DSLR but smaller and lighter, then get the EP2 or other m4/3 camera.

BTW, I just finished a book of images made with XZ1, including lots of indoor photos taken at night without flash. Most of the images were barely edited, many shot with 'auto gradation' as they had lots of extreme back lighting. About half were made with the XZ1 'dramatic tone' filter and no other processing. Noise reduction was not used at all. The book was for my son and really just a test of Apple printing, so I spent very little time preparing it. Got it last week and it WAY overshot my expectations - made me realize once again that viewing images on a computer is just so different than in print. I'd say the IQ of the book overall with XZ1 images was better than anything I ever did with 35mm film. It has seriously made me wonder if the XZ1 or something similar is really all any of us ever need.

--
Roberto M.

Thanks for that lengthy user review/comparo. I've got two DSLRs that I use for work and take with me specifically for a shoot. I'm just looking for a smaller camera ("pocketable" is not even on my radar) to have in my car at all times. Right now that camera is a Panasonic ZS1 and it is what it is, but I can't take it indoors. And it's slow to focus. And...well, it's a point and shoot with a 12x optical zoom that produces decent shots in bright light. I enjoy using it.

I just keep coming across XZ-1s for sale and I don't know anything about them except for their fast lens. It's smaller size compared to an E-P2 isn't really a factor in its favor, as far as I'm concerned. I'm just looking for a camera smaller than a normal sized DSLR. Could be a G12, LX5, XZ-1, E-Pwhatever, just as long as I know I can use it indoors (and outdoors, of course).

An acquaintance took his E-P3 to Europe for his honeymoon, leaving his Canon 7D at home. He would never have done that if he didn't feel confident in the E-P3s abilities under all conditions. That's the kind of confidence I'd like in whatever "smaller" camera I get.

Each one has it's plusses and minuses. The XZ-1 is just a blast to have clipped onto my belt and takes extremely nice photographs. The EPL1 is small but not near as quick to the draw as the XZ-1. I posted these pictures (and a few more) on another thread. I was at an orthopedic surgeons convention (I am not a surgeon but I design surgical implants) and had the XZ-1 clipped to my belt, under my suit jacket.









--
Sincerely,

James A. Rinner

Short answer, If you do any landscape photography the resolution and softness in texture of leaves, bark, grass etc will have turned off on the XZ-1. Mined was returned because my E-PM1 and E-PL1 both blew it away in that regard and it was not even close!

If you are doing portraits however you may like the XZ-1 as this softness hides facial defects but remember if you want to blur the background f/1.8 is good only at widest angle and we all know that a good portrait lens would be around the 85mm -100mm mark in 35mm terms.

Look at some of the full rez landscape examples to be found on the web using the XZ-1 and you'll see the mushiness and lack of very fine detail of which I am speaking. If you can't see this just go ahead and buy the XZ-1 because it won't really matter and you'll love it.

on this and other forums (since I use the G12, P7100, LX-5, and XZ-1), I find the color tonality of the XZ-1 to rate at the very top.

I have the D5100 DSLR and other DSLR's from Olympus and Panasonic (which happens to be just right for me) - but I've always had this ongoing quest to seek out the best P&S (or enthusiast models) on the market - thus I wound up with the 4 listed above.

The XZ-1 is one of those cams that you will either love or.....dislike, depending on if you accept the form factor (which is different than other enthusiast models). The XZ-1 feels like a luxurious instrument - and what is so nice is that the very fast lens (it is given the designation of a Zuiko lens - putting it on par with good DSLR glass), really rounds out the package. But go back and read the DPReview review on this baby as it receives their gold award.

Now granted, it only has a 28 - 112 (or so) zoom factor - but that's where a good 90% of your shooting will take place anyway. In addition, the LCD is of exceptionally high quality.

Now in comparison with the EP-1's, 2's, and 3's - I have the EP-2 (which I love). The XZ-1 (because of it's smaller sensor) will obviously not match the higher ISO capabilities of the EP series of cameras, but the IQ falls in line with what you can expect with the larger models.

Now if you shoot RAW, that's where you want to stay. Although the JPG's out of the XZ-1 are rich and exceptionally colorful, the NR is a bit too high for my tastes and not adjustable within the camera. Thus, shooting RAW will net you the best results - with many images that will give a DSLR a run for it's money at ISO 400 or below. I shoot RAW only and find the RAW files from the XZ-1 to be ideal.

So with regards to color tonality (how the camera renders colors - which I have to admit, is subjective in nature), I rate the enthusiast models in this order:

1st choice: XZ-1
2nd choice: G12
3rd choice: LX-5
4th choice: P7100

But any one of these cams do an absolutely superb job - it's just when comparing their images (color), do I make that comparison.

--

My wife has an Oly XZ-1. I have a GF2 and recently got an E-PM1.

The XZ-1 can definitely hold its own against the kit lenses. Unless you put good glass on the m4/3 cameras you won't see much of a difference and in low light the XZ-1 will win out due to the fast lens. For the price it's a great camera.

Of course the XZ-1 can't keep up with the Pany 25mm lens or the 45-175X lens on the m4/3 cameras. But then again you're talking $1300 vs $400.

We always shoot RAW and go into Olympus Viewer 2 and process into a jpeg after setting the noise reduction from standard down to low. Wish they had an in-camera setting! Above ISO 400 the noise reduction kicks in heavily and can ruin an otherwise good photo. If a file is tricky then I'll put it into a "real" RAW editor and clean it up.

And of course the kicker to the excellent lens is that even at 114mm the aperture is still only 2.5! m4/3 can't beat that in a zoom and until the [email protected] comes out it can't beat it in a prime! (The [email protected] is close)

Caveat: If you like video then the XZ-1 isn't as good. You have to set center focus or even sometimes manual focus if the light is low to prevent focus hunting. The files are huge and you'll eat up twice as much space for video. For us it's no longer a problem since I have the m4/3 camera for video.

Another thorough review, Ben, thanks. Too bad we can't turn NR off completely in jpegs on any point and shoot, I'm not a fan of blurred detail.

I know there's a lot of factors that cause one to favor one camera over another. I'm surprised the Oly rated #1 and the P7100 rated #4 but maybe that would be reversed if some other category other than "color tonality" was considered.

Would the higher ISO capabilities of the E-P2 make up for the slower kit lens? I handled an E-P2 yesterday in a store and the lens did make it "larger" than the G12 sitting next to it, but that's not really a problem for me.

What program do you process the XZ-1's raw files? Does CS5 recognize them? Does the charging of the battery via USB bother you?

Tough to pick a "favorite" camera. I'm down to two DSLRs and one point and shoot so I don't have to now!

Here goes my only edit: do you use the optional viewfinder that came with your E-P2? I'm a viewfinder kind guy and that's one thing I don't like about point and shoots.

Ben Herrmann said:

on this and other forums (since I use the G12, P7100, LX-5, and XZ-1), I find the color tonality of the XZ-1 to rate at the very top.

I have the D5100 DSLR and other DSLR's from Olympus and Panasonic (which happens to be just right for me) - but I've always had this ongoing quest to seek out the best P&S (or enthusiast models) on the market - thus I wound up with the 4 listed above.

The XZ-1 is one of those cams that you will either love or.....dislike, depending on if you accept the form factor (which is different than other enthusiast models). The XZ-1 feels like a luxurious instrument - and what is so nice is that the very fast lens (it is given the designation of a Zuiko lens - putting it on par with good DSLR glass), really rounds out the package. But go back and read the DPReview review on this baby as it receives their gold award.

Now granted, it only has a 28 - 112 (or so) zoom factor - but that's where a good 90% of your shooting will take place anyway. In addition, the LCD is of exceptionally high quality.

Now in comparison with the EP-1's, 2's, and 3's - I have the EP-2 (which I love). The XZ-1 (because of it's smaller sensor) will obviously not match the higher ISO capabilities of the EP series of cameras, but the IQ falls in line with what you can expect with the larger models.

Now if you shoot RAW, that's where you want to stay. Although the JPG's out of the XZ-1 are rich and exceptionally colorful, the NR is a bit too high for my tastes and not adjustable within the camera. Thus, shooting RAW will net you the best results - with many images that will give a DSLR a run for it's money at ISO 400 or below. I shoot RAW only and find the RAW files from the XZ-1 to be ideal.

So with regards to color tonality (how the camera renders colors - which I have to admit, is subjective in nature), I rate the enthusiast models in this order:

1st choice: XZ-1
2nd choice: G12
3rd choice: LX-5
4th choice: P7100

But any one of these cams do an absolutely superb job - it's just when comparing their images (color), do I make that comparison.

--

Click to expand...

Check out the Fuji X10, Nikon P7100 or even the new Canon G1X if its size is ok for you. Any of these 3 would be a excellent complement to yours Dslrs.

X10 some issues with 'orbs' but overall IQ is very good, Nik P7100 a good walk around with its IQ + "long" zoom, ie 200mm, better than most digicams presently avaialble.
Great you have choices
Good luck

Ed

toomanycanons said:

I know there's a lot of factors that cause one to favor one camera over another. I'm surprised the Oly rated #1 and the P7100 rated #4 but maybe that would be reversed if some other category other than "color tonality" was considered.

Click to expand...

Keep in mind here that I love the P7100 and when I rated it as #4, I did so purely in a subjective manner (based on how I prefer how each camera renders colors). You've read some of my musings on the Nikon forum that shows how much I love the P7100 (and all of the others for that matter).

toomanycanons said:

Would the higher ISO capabilities of the E-P2 make up for the slower kit lens? I handled an E-P2 yesterday in a store and the lens did make it "larger" than the G12 sitting next to it, but that's not really a problem for me.

Click to expand...

The Kit lens on the EP-2 (are we talkin' E-PL2 or EP-2 - which are two different level cameras?) isn't bad at all (look at the following several photos of the grist mill shot with the EP-2 and the 14-42 kit lens (equivalent to a 28-84).







But I eventually wound up getting two other lenses for the EP-2 which are absolutely superb IMO - they being the Panny 20 MM f1.7 and the Panny 14-45 OIS. I alternate these two Panny lenses and I never use the kit lens (not that there's anything wrong with the kit lens).

Also keep in mind, the Olympus camera bodies all have the IBIS built in, so any lens that you attach will be stabilized. For those Panny lenses that I attach (that have lens-based OIS on them), I then have a choice of either using the lens-based version or the in body version of the IS - it's that simple (but never use both because they work against each other to actually create blurr).

As for high ISO scenarios with the EP or E-PL series of cameras, I've had no problems whatsoever and am quite pleased. Here are some EP-2 high ISO 2000 shots shot with the Panny 20 MM f1.7 pancake lens:

toomanycanons said:

What program do you process the XZ-1's raw files? Does CS5 recognize them? Does the charging of the battery via USB bother you?

Click to expand...

Firstly - I don't use the USB charging scenario. There are tons of 3rd party battery chargers available to charge that battery, and also, if you look around, you will find the Olympus charger for that particular battery (which I managed to find). So unless you want to charge via the USB system (why anybody would want to do it this way is beyond me), finding a suitable 3rd party charger will be easy.

Also, I use CS-5 which decodes the XZ-1 RAW files superbly. You will also find that XZ-1 RAW files have lots of headroom (especially for a sensor of this size). So all of the conversion software out there have already incorporated the XZ-1 RAW data.

toomanycanons said:

Tough to pick a "favorite" camera. I'm down to two DSLRs and one point and shoot so I don't have to now!

Here goes my only edit: do you use the optional viewfinder that came with your E-P2? I'm a viewfinder kind guy and that's one thing I don't like about point and shoots.

Click to expand...

Yes, periodically I do use it - it works superbly. Once you use an EVF such as that one, you will become spoiled. Of course, when I'm indoors and use an external flash (I never use the internal built-in flash units on any of P&S models), you have to take the EVF off and use the LCD (but keep in mind that the LCD is high resolution and quite nice to look at).

I recently shot these XZ-1 indoor flash images with the 3rd party Nissin Di466 dedicated flash (dedicated for Olympus/Panasonic) in bounce mode at a Christmas Party. As you can see, the XZ-1 has a wonderful color tonality:









--

Nice examples there, Ben. Now you've made me hungry. My point in this exercise is to zero in on a "small (not necessarily pocketable)" camera to keep in my car.

You mentioned E-P2, E-PL2 so I did some reading. Most reviews say the IQ on all the PEN cameras are pretty equal. So then I looked at size differences and, yes, the E-PL2 is smaller than the E-P2 and has a pop-up flash. Less direct controls but smaller.

And I've seen the E-PL2 + kit zoom (the II MRC version of the 14-42) go for $300 used on Fred Miranda.

And I checked the noise levels from 800 on up on the DPReview review of the XZ-1 compared to the E-P2, G12, LX5 and my own D5100 and the E-P2 looks pretty dam clean at ISO 1600 which is sort of a requirement. Decisions decisions.

I'm going to wind up pointing and shooting with whatever smaller camera I get, why not go with one that's decently clean at ISO 1600.

I actually love the plug in charging via USB. Every day we're on vacation we hook the XZ-1 to the laptop to pull off the pictures. By the time we've downloaded them and look through them the XZ-1 is charged or nearly so. So the 2 tasks are combined into one, without ever opening the battery door.

Another option that is still small (though 2x thicker than an XZ-1) is an E-PM1 and the 14-42X lens from panasonic. $775 all said and done though. You can recoup $125 or so if you resell the original Oly kit lens.

But by going up to ISO 1600 or at a pinch ISO 3200 you can negate some of the lens advantage of the XZ-1. And it still fits in a small belt case.

Another option is the E-PM1 + the Pany [email protected]. Then you get the kit lens for daytime shots and the 20mm for low light and/or ultimate portability.

One final option is the Panasonic GF3X (which has the 14-42X lens on it already). You can get one for $570 from Amazon warehouse deals. Look under used. I don't like the camera as much as the E-PM1, but it's much cheaper to get that way.

Here's some samples. Not always the best artistically as I haven't had too much time with the E-PM1 and new lenses yet.

The m4/3 cameras and good lenses are obviously better, but you pay 3-4 times as much to beat the XZ-1 performance. And there lies the choice... how good is good enough for you?

XZ-1





















.
.
.

GF2 + [email protected] (similar to the [email protected])









.
.
.

E-PM1 + 14-42X

Hey, I can't add to the experience with these cameras but I wanted to thank the OP for posting the question and most notably the folks giving replies with samples.

I've been trying to ask around to compare these types of cameras, the only other one I've considered was the Canon S100 but I've heard it's very slow. And, the G1X is getting a lot of buzz but certainly comes with the price tag of a newly-introduce camera and not as many samples or long-term experience.

Look forward to following the thread - and thanks to all!