Early impressions Fuji X system vs. M43

Hi fellow M43 users,

I recently purchased a used Fuji X-T1 with the 18-55mm f2.8-4 lens and the 35mm f1.4. I plan to do a more thorough comparison and a review after a couple of weeks, but for now will make a quick comparison with my E-P5 and the Olympus/Panasonic lenses. I have not done comprehensive tests yet. So keep that in mind.

Built quality/Handling:

I would say this is a toss-up. The X-T1 is superbly build and offers weather sealing. So no complaints here. I do prefer the rubber grip to the e-p5s plastic grip on the front, but the front and back dials on the Pen are much nicer. It does not matter too much on the Fuji because I can set the aperture on the lens and for shutter speed, exposure compensation and ISO there are seperate dials. Overall both are great to use and that is probably a bit more of a compliment to the Fuji which I just started to use.

Image Quality/lenses:

That is also not so clear cut. The 35mm f1.4 produces the smoothest bokeh of all the lenses I have used so far. That includes the Sigma 30mm f1.4 ART lens, the PL25 f1.4 (which has been my favorite until now) and the also very good Oly 25mm f1.8. I am a sucker for bokeh so that is a big plus. Center Sharpness is also better with the Fuji sensor with the 35mm compared to the E-P5 with the 25mm f1.8 at least. I am also very happy to report the 18-55mm produces some very nice images and certainly does not disappoint when it comes to built quality. There is no wobbling or rattling. This thing is made in Japan and you can tell the quality control. BUT it certainly cannot hold its own against the Olympus 12-40mm f2.8 which I use on my E-P5. That is just about the sharpest zoom I have ever used and it is capable of getting the very last bit of resolution out of the E-P5 sensor.

Two problems with the Fuji X-Trans sensor and how see them so far:

Waxy skin tones? So far I don't see this problem. I have not shot portraits over ISO 3200 yet, so may be the problem will present itself at some other time. But as of now I must say the skin tone reproduction is actually the strong suit of the Fuji and imho the biggest advantage over the Olympus which is decent but nothing special. The Olympus Auto WB can also be more easily fooled by difficult lighting.

But that does not mean there are no color problems with the Fuji. I have not been shooting much greenery outdoors due to the season. But when I shot a simple picture of a green candle inside my living room the Fuji messed up the color pretty bad and turned it into an almost brownish, greyish green - very unpleasant and also not true to the eye. The Olympus oversaturated it a bit but the color cast was alright. So the Olympus was easily correctable in pp while the Fuji wasn't. Why? Well, the candles color was of, but other colors were accurate, so adding a little green would not have worked in post. Strange behavior and I will have to test this some more. This may also have to do with the foliage problem some people report. Time will tell.

The second problem was supposed to be high ISO cheating. A non-problem to me. Yes, Fujis ISO values seem inflated. On the other hand, the X-T1 still seems to enjoy about half a stop to one stop advantage when it comes to noise in any given picture in lowlight situations. It does not mean the E-P5 is bad in this regard. It is very good imo. The Fuji is just surprisingly excellent even with the NR dialed down.

AF: The AF speed of the Fuji was my biggest worry. I feared the camera may be too slow or hunt too much to enjoy photography in AF mode. Well, I can report at least with the newest firmware there is no risk for Olympus users to be frustrated. The AF locks on reasonably fast. While it is not as fast in good light as the E-P5, it is actually better (when shooting with the central focus points) once light gets dimmer. While the Oly 25mm is hunting and pumping in low light quite a bit, the Fuji 35mm (considered a slow lens), usually finds its target without swinging wildly back and force. I know that sounds not very believable with all the whining about Fujis AF system. But that is my initial finding.

If you have questions or want to add your opinion on the matter. I welcome every response. Here is a self portrait with the 35mm f1.4 JPEG OOC. More to follow.

Tired...

No worries. Not offended at all. The photo shows smoothness in bokeh imo. Not sharpness. This is a lefthanded selfie no image stabilization at 1/40s second at 50mm equiv. I think it is pretty sharp on nose and eyebrows considering this. But my hands are not very steady. So others may have more success at the same task. 😉

sebiruns wrote:

No worries. Not offended at all. The photo shows smoothness in bokeh imo. Not sharpness. This is a lefthanded selfie no image stabilization at 1/40s second at 50mm equiv. I think it is pretty sharp on nose and eyebrows considering this. But my hands are not very steady. So others may have more success at the same task. 😉

IBIS certainly is a huge advantage of Olympus M43. I should have mentioned this.

Two comparison photos. First a close up.

Fuji X-T1:

View: original size

Olympus E-P5:

View: original size

Now a shot a little more closed down.

Fuji X-T1:

View: original size

Olympus E-P5:

View: original size

Advent1sam wrote:

sebiruns wrote:

Two comparison photos. First a close up.

Fuji X-T1:

View: original size

Olympus E-P5:

View: original size

Now a shot a little more closed down.

Fuji X-T1:

View: original size

Olympus E-P5:

View: original size

Close focus of the 35 1.4 is .28 and the 25 1.8 .25! Why didn't you get the 25 1.4, OOF area would been idential to the fuji at 1.8 and above on the fuji and 1.4 on the PanaLeica 25 1.4

This was a non-scientific comparison. I have posted the same comparison on the Fuji forum and even mentioned your exact point about the PL25 being a better match to the Fuji 35. I still think the Fuji renders OOF a little smoother. But that is splitting hairs. I currently only have the Oly 25mm to compare the Fuji with and I do not plan to buy the PL again just to prove your (valid) point. OOF would not have been identical though, because of the difference in sensor size. That being said. M43 has great camera bodies and lenses. I have been using the system for 3 yrs now and have never been disappointed. This is a post to show some differences. Which is better in any given situation is up to personal taste, I guess.

Elliot H wrote:

sebiruns wrote:

Hi fellow M43 users,

I recently purchased a used Fuji X-T1 with the 18-55mm f2.8-4 lens and the 35mm f1.4. I plan to do a more thorough comparison and a review after a couple of weeks, but for now will make a quick comparison with my E-P5 and the Olympus/Panasonic lenses. I have not done comprehensive tests yet. So keep that in mind.

Built quality/Handling:

I would say this is a toss-up. The X-T1 is superbly build and offers weather sealing. So no complaints here. I do prefer the rubber grip to the e-p5s plastic grip on the front, but the front and back dials on the Pen are much nicer. It does not matter too much on the Fuji because I can set the aperture on the lens and for shutter speed, exposure compensation and ISO there are seperate dials. Overall both are great to use and that is probably a bit more of a compliment to the Fuji which I just started to use.

Image Quality/lenses:

That is also not so clear cut. The 35mm f1.4 produces the smoothest bokeh of all the lenses I have used so far. That includes the Sigma 30mm f1.4 ART lens, the PL25 f1.4 (which has been my favorite until now) and the also very good Oly 25mm f1.8. I am a sucker for bokeh so that is a big plus. Center Sharpness is also better with the Fuji sensor with the 35mm compared to the E-P5 with the 25mm f1.8 at least. I am also very happy to report the 18-55mm produces some very nice images and certainly does not disappoint when it comes to built quality. There is no wobbling or rattling. This thing is made in Japan and you can tell the quality control. BUT it certainly cannot hold its own against the Olympus 12-40mm f2.8 which I use on my E-P5. That is just about the sharpest zoom I have ever used and it is capable of getting the very last bit of resolution out of the E-P5 sensor.

Two problems with the Fuji X-Trans sensor and how see them so far:

Waxy skin tones? So far I don't see this problem. I have not shot portraits over ISO 3200 yet, so may be the problem will present itself at some other time. But as of now I must say the skin tone reproduction is actually the strong suit of the Fuji and imho the biggest advantage over the Olympus which is decent but nothing special. The Olympus Auto WB can also be more easily fooled by difficult lighting.

But that does not mean there are no color problems with the Fuji. I have not been shooting much greenery outdoors due to the season. But when I shot a simple picture of a green candle inside my living room the Fuji messed up the color pretty bad and turned it into an almost brownish, greyish green - very unpleasant and also not true to the eye. The Olympus oversaturated it a bit but the color cast was alright. So the Olympus was easily correctable in pp while the Fuji wasn't. Why? Well, the candles color was of, but other colors were accurate, so adding a little green would not have worked in post. Strange behavior and I will have to test this some more. This may also have to do with the foliage problem some people report. Time will tell.

The second problem was supposed to be high ISO cheating. A non-problem to me. Yes, Fujis ISO values seem inflated. On the other hand, the X-T1 still seems to enjoy about half a stop to one stop advantage when it comes to noise in any given picture in lowlight situations. It does not mean the E-P5 is bad in this regard. It is very good imo. The Fuji is just surprisingly excellent even with the NR dialed down.

AF: The AF speed of the Fuji was my biggest worry. I feared the camera may be too slow or hunt too much to enjoy photography in AF mode. Well, I can report at least with the newest firmware there is no risk for Olympus users to be frustrated. The AF locks on reasonably fast. While it is not as fast in good light as the E-P5, it is actually better (when shooting with the central focus points) once light gets dimmer. While the Oly 25mm is hunting and pumping in low light quite a bit, the Fuji 35mm (considered a slow lens), usually finds its target without swinging wildly back and force. I know that sounds not very believable with all the whining about Fujis AF system. But that is my initial finding.

If you have questions or want to add your opinion on the matter. I welcome every response. Here is a self portrait with the 35mm f1.4 JPEG OOC. More to follow.

Tired...

thanks for your review/comparison

please do not be offended but,

not seeing sharpness in this photo

And the color balance is also way off , but thanks for the info.

nebulla wrote:

Elliot H wrote:

sebiruns wrote:

Hi fellow M43 users,

I recently purchased a used Fuji X-T1 with the 18-55mm f2.8-4 lens and the 35mm f1.4. I plan to do a more thorough comparison and a review after a couple of weeks, but for now will make a quick comparison with my E-P5 and the Olympus/Panasonic lenses. I have not done comprehensive tests yet. So keep that in mind.

Built quality/Handling:

I would say this is a toss-up. The X-T1 is superbly build and offers weather sealing. So no complaints here. I do prefer the rubber grip to the e-p5s plastic grip on the front, but the front and back dials on the Pen are much nicer. It does not matter too much on the Fuji because I can set the aperture on the lens and for shutter speed, exposure compensation and ISO there are seperate dials. Overall both are great to use and that is probably a bit more of a compliment to the Fuji which I just started to use.

Image Quality/lenses:

That is also not so clear cut. The 35mm f1.4 produces the smoothest bokeh of all the lenses I have used so far. That includes the Sigma 30mm f1.4 ART lens, the PL25 f1.4 (which has been my favorite until now) and the also very good Oly 25mm f1.8. I am a sucker for bokeh so that is a big plus. Center Sharpness is also better with the Fuji sensor with the 35mm compared to the E-P5 with the 25mm f1.8 at least. I am also very happy to report the 18-55mm produces some very nice images and certainly does not disappoint when it comes to built quality. There is no wobbling or rattling. This thing is made in Japan and you can tell the quality control. BUT it certainly cannot hold its own against the Olympus 12-40mm f2.8 which I use on my E-P5. That is just about the sharpest zoom I have ever used and it is capable of getting the very last bit of resolution out of the E-P5 sensor.

Two problems with the Fuji X-Trans sensor and how see them so far:

Waxy skin tones? So far I don't see this problem. I have not shot portraits over ISO 3200 yet, so may be the problem will present itself at some other time. But as of now I must say the skin tone reproduction is actually the strong suit of the Fuji and imho the biggest advantage over the Olympus which is decent but nothing special. The Olympus Auto WB can also be more easily fooled by difficult lighting.

But that does not mean there are no color problems with the Fuji. I have not been shooting much greenery outdoors due to the season. But when I shot a simple picture of a green candle inside my living room the Fuji messed up the color pretty bad and turned it into an almost brownish, greyish green - very unpleasant and also not true to the eye. The Olympus oversaturated it a bit but the color cast was alright. So the Olympus was easily correctable in pp while the Fuji wasn't. Why? Well, the candles color was of, but other colors were accurate, so adding a little green would not have worked in post. Strange behavior and I will have to test this some more. This may also have to do with the foliage problem some people report. Time will tell.

The second problem was supposed to be high ISO cheating. A non-problem to me. Yes, Fujis ISO values seem inflated. On the other hand, the X-T1 still seems to enjoy about half a stop to one stop advantage when it comes to noise in any given picture in lowlight situations. It does not mean the E-P5 is bad in this regard. It is very good imo. The Fuji is just surprisingly excellent even with the NR dialed down.

AF: The AF speed of the Fuji was my biggest worry. I feared the camera may be too slow or hunt too much to enjoy photography in AF mode. Well, I can report at least with the newest firmware there is no risk for Olympus users to be frustrated. The AF locks on reasonably fast. While it is not as fast in good light as the E-P5, it is actually better (when shooting with the central focus points) once light gets dimmer. While the Oly 25mm is hunting and pumping in low light quite a bit, the Fuji 35mm (considered a slow lens), usually finds its target without swinging wildly back and force. I know that sounds not very believable with all the whining about Fujis AF system. But that is my initial finding.

If you have questions or want to add your opinion on the matter. I welcome every response. Here is a self portrait with the 35mm f1.4 JPEG OOC. More to follow.

Tired...

thanks for your review/comparison

please do not be offended but,

not seeing sharpness in this photo

And the color balance is also way off , but thanks for the info.

Color balance? Were you there? I did not notice you. Just out of curiosity: How do you judge color balance in an available light situation without having been to the scene? You must have great eyes.

Nice comparison.

I do like the EPL5 shots slightly better

thechoson wrote:

I have a Fuji X100s and have shot with the X-Pro1, X-E1, and X-T1. I agree with most of what you said regarding Fuji. I really like the colors, though it does seem to struggle with greenery like grass, brushes, etc. The waxy skin thing does show up, usually above ISO 3200. It's not a huge deal to me with lighter skin - Asians and Caucasians, say. But when shooting people with darker skin, yea, it doesn't look as pleasant imo.

Getting to the point, IQ wise I have nothing to fault with regarding Fuji. I like the IQ, I like the SOOC JPEGs. I love the handling and look of their cameras, and all the lenses I've tried have been terrific.

That being said, overall I still have mixed feelings about Fuji. This is probably a product of the fact that I am still unwilling to ditch my DSLR kit (Canon) as my "main" shooting kit. Fuji's lenses and bodies are both rather pricey for the feature set and esp in comparison to the competition. So it is a bit pricey for a secondary system, though Fuji would probably be near the top of my list if I wanted an APS-C mirrorless system as my only camera system. But then I do have an issue with the value proposition, as the X-T1 with 18-55 kit is pricier than a Sony A7 full-frame with its kit lens.

And this brings up an issue I've noticed lately with the Fuji "community". This means a lot of users, bloggers, etc. Those associated with Fuji really seem to have some kind of full-frame inferiority complex. I keep reading stuff about how the X-Trans can rival full-frame performance, "why would you need FF when you have Fuji", Fuji negates need for full-frame, full-frame is not that much better than APS-C, blah blah blah. This is getting kind of old, and really unnecessary as Fuji can stand on its own with their excellent IQ. I'd say Fuji community seems really "defensive" about their cameras. Like I said, I love Fuji IQ and love my X100s, but at the same time I don't think it's some kind of miracle camera.

In that regard, I do find something more "honest" about M43. M43 doesn't really seem to harbor any illusions or desire to compete with full-frame or larger sensor cameras. Instead I like how M43 seems to continue on the mission of providing product that fits M43. Fairly compact bodies, compact lenses, a wide assortment of lenses at varying price levels, with good IQ and video capabilities. I love it as a complementary system to a DSLR. I recently picked up a GF7 with 12-32 and 35-100 f/4-f/5.6 kit from Costco. A lot of people scoff at the GF7, but I can't believe the level of IQ and I get from these 2 lenses and such a small body. I'd say the M43 sensors basically rival the last generation 18mp Canon APS-C sensors for low-light performance (and obviously have superior DR).

So that was my rather long-winded reply to this thread and my own thoughts on Fuji vs M43.

Thanks for your thoughts on the topic. Obviously I hadn't have enough contact with the Fuji "community" yet. You will find the occasional "M43 is better than full frame because..." threads but it is not very often and can easily be ignored.

In the end I can only say what drew me to try the X-T1 instead of the A7 which I also looked into. As I wrote on another post I really value good built quality and a substancial feeling camera without it being too bulky. Now the original A7 certainly is not bulky but it feels kind of hollow and weak (same can be said about some older X-cameras except for the X-Pro1). I also like the retro design of some digital cameras. Loved my E-M5, still love my E-P5 and love the X-T1. Sonys offerings don't even try to compete here. Now these reasons are very personal and do not say anything about the overall quality of a system. But in the past I shot more pictures with cameras I loved than with the ones I used because they were just capable of great images. So I will stick to that reasoning.

sebiruns wrote:

Advent1sam wrote:

sebiruns wrote:

Two comparison photos. First a close up.

Fuji X-T1:

View: original size

Olympus E-P5:

View: original size

Now a shot a little more closed down.

Fuji X-T1:

View: original size

Olympus E-P5:

View: original size

Close focus of the 35 1.4 is .28 and the 25 1.8 .25! Why didn't you get the 25 1.4, OOF area would been idential to the fuji at 1.8 and above on the fuji and 1.4 on the PanaLeica 25 1.4

This was a non-scientific comparison. I have posted the same comparison on the Fuji forum and even mentioned your exact point about the PL25 being a better match to the Fuji 35. I still think the Fuji renders OOF a little smoother. But that is splitting hairs. I currently only have the Oly 25mm to compare the Fuji with and I do not plan to buy the PL again just to prove your (valid) point. OOF would not have been identical though, because of the difference in sensor size. That being said. M43 has great camera bodies and lenses. I have been using the system for 3 yrs now and have never been disappointed. This is a post to show some differences. Which is better in any given situation is up to personal taste, I guess.

Comparison has to be scientific in order to compare (has to be done in studio under controlled environment).

These photos are the perfect proof that early impressions are sour grapes. Also, I guess, IQ of both cameras is very close, and human factor makes a difference.

I'm wondering what is the need to post these so-called "comparisons". What do you want to prove? Or what do you want to show?

Robert Garcia NYC wrote:

Shoot what you love. If bokeh and image quality is your thing just go a buy a FF you are headed in that direction anyhow, save sometime. I've owned both the Oly em1 and Fuji xt1 and between those two to me the Oly was way better way more keepers. The texture and details of file go to the Oly. The Fuji was good it gives a certain look to the files like the one you posted. As for the color the Fuji are easier to deal with but honestly if you learn how get good white balance the differences are not that much. I didn't like jpegs of either Fuji really messed up with the current xtran if I had to pick I would go with the Oly. Autofocus and getting that shot I couldn't trust the Fuji really messed me up at an event so I sold it.

Everything is a compromise. Size of the overall package (weight not so much) matters to me as well. I can see myself rather reinvesting in m43 once they offer a bigger selection of very fast primes than going Full Frame. A7 + 28-70 gives me less reach and a bigger package than the X-T1 + 18-55. Manual controls are also better with Olympus and Fuji. But I get where you are coming from. Ten years ago that happened to me with a Canon DSLR on Galapagos (sensor failure). It eats away your trust in a companies products. Luckily that was a vacation. Still sucked having to rely on a point and shoot on a trip that expansive.

I don't want to prove anything. Just sharing my early impressions. I am writing down some observations for those interested in either camera. If you want a scientific test there are plenty of them out there.

sebiruns wrote:

I don't want to prove anything. Just sharing my early impressions. I am writing down some observations for those interested in either camera. If you want a scientific test there are plenty of them out there.

I do not think you have helped anyone interested in either camera. Moreover, you've done quite opposite - created confusion about cameras IQ. This is pure "vanity fair"