My first impressions of the X-E1

Started Oct 21, 2012 | Discussions thread
wy2lam Veteran Member • Posts: 3,121
Re: My first impressions of the X-E1

amalric wrote:

awelch100 wrote:

amalric wrote:

Thank you for such a clear observation. I am interested in both the E-M5 and the X-E1 for different reasons.

IQ however is not one. Not in terms of resolution and not in DR, at least when I pixelpeeped. I think we'll have to wait for DxO to have the truth.

Using the smaller 4/3's sensor has some unavoidable consequences when it comes to image quality, mostly regarding low ISO performance and depth of field. While this may not concern a casual user, anyone who will be shooting portraits or doing a lot of available light photography will probably find the smaller sensor to be unacceptable. Personally, I won't consider anything smaller than APS-C, no matter how impressive the resolution or dynamic range.

Do you shoot portraits at all? Because the difference between formats is almost zero in the vertical and some 10% on each side in the horizontal. And so the difference in depth of field is inessential, depending much more on how fast your lenses are.

4/3 is even a better proportion for portraits, APS for landscape. So much for commonplaces and fanboy parading.


Weird conclusion.

That 10% on each side makes a big difference if you shoot portraits - how much of subject do you want to include in your portrait? Headshots? Waist level? Most of the "portraits" that come out of m4/3 are headshots if you want good subject isolation - because you'll have to move in in order to achieve the same subject isolation.

With a longer sensor you can include more of the subject without having to back away - that backing away is what kills subject isolation - and that "10% on each side" is extremely significant if you care about taking portraits that are not just headshots.

The lenses? Let's see (native m4/3 lenses only)

m4/3: 25/1.4. 45/1.8. 75/1.8 (and back away a lot)

Fuji X: 35/1.4. 56/1.4 (although only in 2013).

From someone moving from a 85/1.4 Nikk0r, the 56/1.4 will feel almost right at home with an equivalent of 84/2. The 45/1.8...turns out to be about 90/3.6 - exactly the kind of lenses that can guarantee good isolation only with headshots.

The 25 wide open is about 500 metres behind what the 35/1.4 can do, albeit with a Leica label and a price tag disproportional to basically a 50/2.8 equivalent.

The OM-D is a great body. I'll reconsider the m4/3 system if it has the f/1.0 or f/1.2 AF lenses the system really needs - well, but to get there, they'll need a 45/1.4 first...

 wy2lam's gear list:wy2lam's gear list
Fujifilm X-E2 Fujifilm XF 35mm F1.4 R Samyang 8mm F2.8 UMC Fisheye Fujifilm XF 18-55mm F2.8-4 R LM OIS Fujifilm XF 56mm F1.2 R +5 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow