Camerasize.com comparison: GX7, E-P5, NEX6, X-E1

Started Aug 2, 2013 | Discussions
TrapperJohn Forum Pro • Posts: 16,478
That's how Sony designed it

There is no reason that a M43 setup can't be as thin.

There is a valid reason that the M43 bodies are not as thin.

Having tried out a few NEX setups, I find them to be a bit awkward with one of the larger NEX or Alpha lenses mounted. Useable, but you don't quite get the firm grip you get with a Pen or GX/GF, let alone the G, GH, or OMD. I also find the ultra thin construction to be a bit harder to hold steady, which can be an issue with NEX because it uses OIS and not all of the lenses are stabilized.

Just my own experience, but I prefer the slightly thicker construction of the small M43 bodies to the ultra thin NEX bodies. The NEX bodies outside of the NEX7 are, for me, a bit too small. Same issue I had with the Nikon One and Pentax Q - too small. Limits the number of useable controls, no controls on top, tends to have you menu diving to change just about anything.

Naturally, if someone puts portability way above functionality, the very small size of NEX would be an advantage.

nzmacro
nzmacro Forum Pro • Posts: 14,370
Sorry Jeff, macro

Sorry mate, getting late here and I should be in bed

Macro with the left hand EVF. I use the Raynox DCR-250 as you know and on the 100-300 Canon FD I get a 3:1 at a lens to subject distance of around 8-10", so its not like with your eye at the EVF you are getting too close to the subject. So from that distance, its not an issue. With a macro lens and the need to get a lot closer, it could be a bit strange to start with, but like anything, you get use to it real quick.

All the best Jeff, I better ZZzzzzz mate

Danny.

-- hide signature --
 nzmacro's gear list:nzmacro's gear list
Sony Alpha NEX-7 Olympus E-M1 Olympus OM-D E-M10 +7 more
Sean Nelson
Sean Nelson Forum Pro • Posts: 12,531
Re: Camerasize.com comparison: GX7, E-P5, NEX6, X-E1
1

amvrvd wrote:

I wonder where are the hordes of nitpickers, naysayers and just plain DSLR lovers that told me time and again that such a camera would end up being X-Pro 1 sized, HA ! 3 years saying the same mantra and now they're quiet.

Do you thing perhaps it's possible that the technology to do this has advanced in those last three years...?

amvrvd Regular Member • Posts: 223
Re: Camerasize.com comparison: GX7, E-P5, NEX6, X-E1
1

Sean Nelson wrote:

amvrvd wrote:

I wonder where are the hordes of nitpickers, naysayers and just plain DSLR lovers that told me time and again that such a camera would end up being X-Pro 1 sized, HA ! 3 years saying the same mantra and now they're quiet.

Do you thing perhaps it's possible that the technology to do this has advanced in those last three years...?

The technology didn't need to advance for three years to make this possible just now, this was possible a long time ago, since the X100, Oly just didn't (and still doesn't) want to do it. I didn't start that debate out of thin air, I did it because the technology was already available at the time. People argued that it wasn't physically possible because they're fixated with the idea that only DSLR-shaped cameras can have viewfinders. Even when presented with facts, schematics and actual cameras like the Nex 6&7 they still argued this was impossible for m4/3, just because they didn't like the idea (even though the existence of a camera such as the GX7 doesn't affect them in the least). People were actually arguing against built-in EVFs like the GX7's just a couple of weeks before its announcement. This wasn't a matter of technological advancement, that debate was settled the moment Sony and Fuji released their CSC's with EVF, this was a matter of people being too stubborn to accept change and diversity, they were arguing just for the purpose of being contrarian, I posted schematics and measurements showing how you could remove the OMD's useless hump and achieve something like the GX7 and people still argued that such a sacrilege would yield a X Pro 1 sized monstrosity.

They were proven wrong with the X100, then with the Nex 7, then the 6 now m4/3 finally has its own RF-styled camera with EVF and they're as silent, no more arguments, no more 6 page threads trying to sell the same BS argument that an EVF wouldn't fit inside an body like the E-P series. All I wanted was to make a point in favor of diversity and now m4/3 users finally have the choice of all sorts of camera bodies, if we need EVFs we're no longer limited to faux-DSLRs or costly add-ons, we can choose now. Thanks to the GX7 m4/3s not only has the widest lens catalog, we also have the most diverse body catalog, from faux-DSLR to P&S replacements, and now faux RFs. There's every kind of camera for any kind of user, that's the big milestone here, something the naysayers were not willing to see.

TrapperJohn Forum Pro • Posts: 16,478
What's interesting about those comparisons...

For all the fuss about APS being 'a lot larger' and 'a lot better', at least in theory, those comparison shots show... there really isn't that much difference in sensor size between APS and 4/3.

FrankS009
FrankS009 Veteran Member • Posts: 5,220
Wrong weight for GX7

The Camerasize.com lists the weight of the camera at 512 grams. In fact it is 402 grams, making the GX7 and the FM5 almost exactly the same size and weight except the latter is higher because of the hump, and the GX7 is a bit thicker because of the eye cup.

F.

Alexis D Regular Member • Posts: 467
Re: Camerasize.com comparison: GX7, E-P5, NEX6, X-E1
1

Their sizes are quite close, so much so that other things are more important, and any decision should depend on what is important to you:

- ultimate IQ - X-XE1 but poor focusing, but large and expensive lenses, some with no IS, fixed LCD, no touchscreen, no 1/8000s, not much grip.

- smallest size with a pancake zoom - NEX-6 but no touchscreen, plus big and average lenses, ordinary AF, no 1/8000 sec.

- IBIS and good AF performance - E-PL5 - but no built-in flash, and no automatic CA correction and some problems when using Panasonic lenses (purple spot, banding, rattlesnake), no 1/8000 sec.

- 5-axis IBIS and 1/8000 sec and FP - E-P5, but no built-in EVF and very expensive, no automatic CA correction and problems when using some Panasonic lens.

- best all round package with no significant flaw - GX7, not the best (but still respectable) in its IQ, IBIS and EVF, but it has many other nice features to compensate like a unique tilting EVF, plus all the other nice features like FP, 1/8000 sec, lots of lenses to use (all stabilised). The total is a lot more than the sum of its parts if you want something that can handle anything because of all the features it has inside a body that is virtually the same size as the others. That's the real beauty of this camera.

tjuster1 Senior Member • Posts: 1,825
Re: Camerasize.com comparison: GX7, E-P5, NEX6, X-E1

Alexis D wrote:

- best all round package with no significant flaw - GX7, not the best (but still respectable) in its IQ,

Hopefully, yes, but right now it's only speculation.

IBIS

again, we know nothing . . . maybe the IBIS implementation sucks, like that of the PM1. Maybe it's great. We do know that Panasonic itself says it's worse than OIS, which probably means it's closer to the PM1 than the OMD. Bottom line, we don't know how effective it is.

and EVF,

again, how good is the EVF? Given all the griping about the last EVF Panasonic produced (in the GH3) I think it's wise to withhold judgement here too.

but it has many other nice features to compensate like a unique tilting EVF, plus all the other nice features like FP, 1/8000 sec, lots of lenses to use (all stabilised)

I assume you mean stabilized because of the IBIS, because obviously many m43 lenses are not stabilized.

. The total is a lot more than the sum of its parts if you want something that can handle anything because of all the features it has inside a body that is virtually the same size as the others. That's the real beauty of this camera.

I hope you're right!

 tjuster1's gear list:tjuster1's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-GM1 Olympus OM-D E-M10 Panasonic Lumix G Vario 14-45mm F3.5-5.6 ASPH OIS Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 9-18mm F4.0-5.6 Panasonic Lumix G 20mm F1.7 ASPH +5 more
Bob Meyer Veteran Member • Posts: 5,375
Re: Camerasize.com comparison: GX7, E-P5, NEX6, X-E1

l_objectif wrote:

For me, GX1 has the perfect size! I am very disappointed of the size of GX7, although I am well aware that on the paper, it should be a fantastic camera!... I was impatiently waiting for this camera; but as I need a "portable", now I am not sure I am going to get it at this size!

As for the looks, to me Nex 6 looks the best of the bunch. I still can't get over with fat design of the GX7 grip! It really doesn't go with the rest!

I'm just blown away by some of the comments on this forum. The GX7 is still a very small camera, and not really all that much bigger than the GX1:

http://camerasize.com/compare/#183,472

Just overlay the 1 on top of the 7.

If you want a point and shoot, buy a point and shoot. But how do you think Panasonic could possibly squeeze everything the GX7 offers, AND the decent control layout,  into a smaller package? Yes, the NEX is smaller, but the control layout pretty much sucks, and you have to resort to the (horrible) menu system to do things that are controlled by buttons or switches on Panasonic cameras.

And for those of us who like to use our cameras, rather than look at them, that grip is a Godsend.

 Bob Meyer's gear list:Bob Meyer's gear list
Panasonic Lumix G Vario 7-14mm F4 ASPH Panasonic 12-35mm F2.8 Panasonic Lumix G Vario 14-140mm F3.5-5.6 ASPH. / Power O.I.S Panasonic Lumix DMC-G3 Panasonic Lumix DMC-G7 +6 more
MichaelKJ Veteran Member • Posts: 3,466
Re: What's interesting about those comparisons...

Not sure I get your point. The difference in sensor size between the two formats is a matter of fact.

 MichaelKJ's gear list:MichaelKJ's gear list
Sony RX100 III Olympus PEN E-PL1 Olympus OM-D E-M5 +1 more
tjuster1 Senior Member • Posts: 1,825
Re: Camerasize.com comparison: GX7, E-P5, NEX6, X-E1
2

Bob Meyer wrote:

l_objectif wrote:

For me, GX1 has the perfect size! I am very disappointed of the size of GX7, although I am well aware that on the paper, it should be a fantastic camera!... I was impatiently waiting for this camera; but as I need a "portable", now I am not sure I am going to get it at this size!

As for the looks, to me Nex 6 looks the best of the bunch. I still can't get over with fat design of the GX7 grip! It really doesn't go with the rest!

I'm just blown away by some of the comments on this forum. The GX7 is still a very small camera, and not really all that much bigger than the GX1:

http://camerasize.com/compare/#183,472

Just overlay the 1 on top of the 7.

If you want a point and shoot, buy a point and shoot. But how do you think Panasonic could possibly squeeze everything the GX7 offers, AND the decent control layout, into a smaller package? Yes, the NEX is smaller, but the control layout pretty much sucks, and you have to resort to the (horrible) menu system to do things that are controlled by buttons or switches on Panasonic cameras.

And for those of us who like to use our cameras, rather than look at them, that grip is a Godsend.

Those of us who like to carry our cameras in our pockets really like small cameras, and the GX7 is just too big for that. I presently carry a PM2 with either 14mm or 17mm pancake, and yes it fits in my pocket which means I have it with me nearly all the time.

And while maybe Panasonic couldn't squeeze everything the GX7 offers into a small package, I think Sony could and eventually will. The NEX-6 small, the NEX-5N is even smaller (though lacks the EVF)--and both of those have an APS-C-sized sensor.

To me the GX7 is not a "very small camera"--it's a medium-sized m43 camera that sacrifices size for more controls and grip. I understand that many (probably most) people in here applaud that decision, but there are others who still crave a tiny GF3/PM2-sized camera with a built-in EVF and all the bells and whistles.

 tjuster1's gear list:tjuster1's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-GM1 Olympus OM-D E-M10 Panasonic Lumix G Vario 14-45mm F3.5-5.6 ASPH OIS Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 9-18mm F4.0-5.6 Panasonic Lumix G 20mm F1.7 ASPH +5 more
OP sderdiarian Veteran Member • Posts: 4,227
Re: Camerasize.com comparison: GX7, E-P5, NEX6, X-E1

I appreciate Panasonic's elegantly designed answer to a just-right-sized (yes, I guess many of us differ on this ) camera with so many desirable features built-in. Up until now all attempts have had at least one glaring omission:

  • NEX 6: priced right and has an excellent sensor and EVF, but no IBIS, non-touch screen and limited lens selection
  • E-P5: could have been the perfect camera, but stumbled by charging $300 for an add-on EVF
  • X-E1: a bit large, old-tech LCD (low res/non-touch fixed 2.8"), no IBIS, limited lens selection

Panasonic has simply put it all together and at a fair price. While we wait to see how it tests on such critical items as actual quality of its new sensor, IBIS, EVF, LCD, buttons, shutter noise, etc., for the present let's give Panasonic a well deserved spotlight for bringing such a camera to market.

And before we pounce on their past struggles with sensor design, let's not forget the skepticism they were once met with upon developing their own lenses without Leica's oversight. The benchmark 20mm f1.7 turned such attitudes on their head overnight, and the 12-35mm and 35-100mm zooms now set the mark in their class.

Tip of the hat, Panny!

-- hide signature --

Sailin' Steve

 sderdiarian's gear list:sderdiarian's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-GM1 Olympus OM-D E-M10 II Panasonic Lumix G 20mm F1.7 ASPH Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 60mm 1:2.8 Macro Olympus M.Zuiko ED 75-300mm 1:4.8-6.7 II +1 more
Bob Meyer Veteran Member • Posts: 5,375
Re: What's interesting about those comparisons...

Yes, but the "fact" of the size difference is actually a lot smaller than the APS-C proponents seem to think, and would like us to believe. They're always comparing m43 to FF (2 stops more DOF, 4 times the light gathering, etc.), but few people really shoot FF. The difference in sensor area, DOF and "light gathering" between m43 and APS-C is much less significant.

But the DSLR fans don't want to admit that "fact."

 Bob Meyer's gear list:Bob Meyer's gear list
Panasonic Lumix G Vario 7-14mm F4 ASPH Panasonic 12-35mm F2.8 Panasonic Lumix G Vario 14-140mm F3.5-5.6 ASPH. / Power O.I.S Panasonic Lumix DMC-G3 Panasonic Lumix DMC-G7 +6 more
TTLstalker Regular Member • Posts: 390
Re: Camerasize.com comparison: GX7, E-P5, NEX6, X-E1

The GX7 looks nice.  I would prefer it better if it was the size of the camera it was modeled after. Sometimes I think some of these cameras are made a bit too small.  Just because they are rangefinder style doesn't mean they have to be so small.  Well Fuji is a bit larger.  They are not not really pocketable unless you have a pancake lens on them and even then it probably has to be a jacket pocket.  Such small cameras are a little cramped and fiddly for my hands.

Bob Meyer Veteran Member • Posts: 5,375
Re: Camerasize.com comparison: GX7, E-P5, NEX6, X-E1

I agree that we need to wait to know for sure about many of the camera's features, but I think the EVF comparison with the GH3 isn't meaningful.

First, the GH3 isn't Panny's most recent EVF, the G6 is, and it's been widely praised. Why the difference?  With the GH3, Panny crammed a widescreen 16:9 display and optics into the camera. The G6, and GX7, have a more normal 4:3 screen.

And several previews have already been published that say the EVF is fine, but maybe a little hard for eyeglass wearers to see the edges of the display. Worries about the EVF in the GH3 were already being raised by this point.

 Bob Meyer's gear list:Bob Meyer's gear list
Panasonic Lumix G Vario 7-14mm F4 ASPH Panasonic 12-35mm F2.8 Panasonic Lumix G Vario 14-140mm F3.5-5.6 ASPH. / Power O.I.S Panasonic Lumix DMC-G3 Panasonic Lumix DMC-G7 +6 more
Sergey_Green
Sergey_Green Forum Pro • Posts: 10,371
It is not the comparisons ..
2

TrapperJohn wrote:

For all the fuss about APS being 'a lot larger' and 'a lot better', at least in theory, those comparison shots show... there really isn't that much difference in sensor size between APS and 4/3.

It is what the other does and you are able to see in them.

Just think about it, 61% of the area, and 100% of the area, which one will do better as an imager, in your view? Provided everything else is equal. I mean, it's not like a rocket science, is it?

-- hide signature --

- sergey

 Sergey_Green's gear list:Sergey_Green's gear list
Samsung Galaxy Note 10.1
MichaelKJ Veteran Member • Posts: 3,466
Re: What's interesting about those comparisons...

Bob Meyer wrote:

Yes, but the "fact" of the size difference is actually a lot smaller than the APS-C proponents seem to think, and would like us to believe. They're always comparing m43 to FF (2 stops more DOF, 4 times the light gathering, etc.), but few people really shoot FF. The difference in sensor area, DOF and "light gathering" between m43 and APS-C is much less significant.

But the DSLR fans don't want to admit that "fact."

I am in complete agreement. Nevertheless, I fail to understand how the comparable body sizes of the cameras that the OP compared proves anything about IQ or DOF.  What would your response be if someone posted a comparison of the E-PM2 with a larger APS-C mirrorless and used the difference in sizes to claim that APS-C has much better IQ & DOF?

 MichaelKJ's gear list:MichaelKJ's gear list
Sony RX100 III Olympus PEN E-PL1 Olympus OM-D E-M5 +1 more
TrapperJohn Forum Pro • Posts: 16,478
It was just an offhand observation

For all the fuss that's made over APS... just looking at those bodies lined up, and looking at the sensors that are clearly visible... APS isn't that much larger.

I am painfully aware of the specs on both, hear it on a regular basis.

But I look at that comparison, look at the photos that result, and have to think Shakespeare - much ado about nothing.

Of course, when you start putting lenses on those bodies, as most of us tend to do, that smaller sensor sure has a lot more good, small, native glass.

OP sderdiarian Veteran Member • Posts: 4,227
Re: Camerasize.com: Why the GX7 has that nice large grip

MichaelKJ wrote:

I fail to understand how the comparable body sizes of the cameras that the OP compared proves anything about IQ or DOF.

It was never intended to, nor was it stated to. The cameras included in the posted comparison compete as rangefinder style bodies with 16MP sensors in a roughly similar price class, and the images were meant to simply represent an appearance comparison. Others then took the ball and ran with it (no surprise there).

Back to the GX7, some complain it's grip is outsized to the camera. I feel otherwise, it's clearly intended to improve the functionality of the camera with a full range of mFT lenses. Take a look at it with the larger/heavier (by mFT terms, that is!) 12-35mm and 35-100mm zooms. I can imagine how nicely this body will balance with them, along with smaller delights like the Pana-Leica 25mm f1.4:

http://j.mp/16qbOPF

-- hide signature --

Sailin' Steve

 sderdiarian's gear list:sderdiarian's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-GM1 Olympus OM-D E-M10 II Panasonic Lumix G 20mm F1.7 ASPH Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 60mm 1:2.8 Macro Olympus M.Zuiko ED 75-300mm 1:4.8-6.7 II +1 more
Great Bustard Forum Pro • Posts: 38,958
Well...
2

TrapperJohn wrote:

For all the fuss that's made over APS... just looking at those bodies lined up, and looking at the sensors that are clearly visible... APS isn't that much larger.

I am painfully aware of the specs on both, hear it on a regular basis.

But I look at that comparison, look at the photos that result, and have to think Shakespeare - much ado about nothing.

...the difference in sensor size between APS-C mirrorless and mFT is 2/3 of a stop, so if 2/3 of a stop "isn't that much larger" then, yes, you are correct.

Of course, when you start putting lenses on those bodies, as most of us tend to do, that smaller sensor sure has a lot more good, small, native glass.

For sure, there are some outstanding lenses for mFT that may very well outperform many of the selections available for APS-C. However, a good comparison might be the Olympus 45 / 1.8 against the Sony 50 / 1.8 OSS:

http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Lenses/Compare-Camera-Lenses/Compare-lenses/(lens1)/532/(brand)/Olympus/(camera1)/0/(lens2)/745/(brand2)/Sony/(camera2)/0

and, at least in that one particular comparison, it seems that NEX is doing OK against mFT.

Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads