Fujifilm or OM System?…

[Harold Godwinson]

Starting out from scratch. Looking for a relatively small, lightweight system, the purpose of which initially will be for travel, family vacations, etc. At some point, I may expand into somewhat more serious photography, making this sort of a hobby.

I don’t intend on doing any sports/action photography nor any wildlife, at least the type of wildlife that moves. So basically just stills only, no video, and definitely no street photography.

I’ve spent a fair amount of time looking into both Fujifilm and OM systems. Both offer travel bodies (X-S20 and OM-5) which would suit me fine in terms of their size, weight, and ergonomics. Both systems also offer lenses that would cover the ranges and types that I would be interested in.

Fuji offers their rather unique film simulations, as well as the ability to tweak quite a few parameters that go into making a straight out of the camera JPEG. That appeals to me as I don’t enjoy post processing. OM systems on the other hand, offers some really intriguing computational photography features. Frankly, It’s kind of a toss up for me as to which of those features is more valuable than the other.

I’ve reached the point where I’m fairly certain I’m going to go with a Fuji system. Initially, it would be the X-S20 but when I get to the point where I want to get more serious about my photography, they do have the X-T5 or the X-H2.
I’ve handled both of those, or should I say all three of those, at a local camera shop and all would be very suitable for my needs. However, before I make a final decision, I thought I would ask here, whether or not there might be some other advantage that OM systems cameras have over Fuji that I may have missed.

I might add that one of the things that is pushing me towards the Fuji is my understanding that the larger sensor will provide me with better IQ overall and specifically better lower light performance as well as dynamic range. But I suppose the question needs to be asked, how noticeable or significant is this?

So what does everybody think, am I missing anything?

Thanks, Hal

 

[John Crowe]

Out of those two I would choose Fuji, just because you can eventually upgrade to one of their 40MP sensor cameras.

The APS-C sensor will perform better for larger prints.

 

[MrAndreas]

M43 is the frame size on par with the old 16mm cinematic film. At the time, 16mm movie cameras were popular for shooting TV documentaries, etc., so the IQ was on par with the old CRT home TV sets from the 1960s - 1970s. Today, smartphones beat the M43 for image quality.

Fuji sensor is the frame size on par with the old 35mm cinematic film, which served mankind for decades, on the huge cinema screens. So you get some proven picture look, with 3D pop, much thinner DoF, OOF blur, etc.

And the difference in size and weight is not that perceivable. The difference in IQ is.

--
https://www.viewbug.com/member/stesinou

 

[plantdoc]

I have no problems making excellent 13 x 19 in prints from OM cameras in most situations with a good lens. I do post process RAW files. Even less than perfect images, slight AF errors, loss of fine detail due to excessive high ISO noise look fine as an 8 x 10 print or viewed on an iPad. Perhaps, I am too relaxed about ultimate IQ.
greg

 

[ahaslett]

The differences between MFT and APSC sensors in terms of DR and subject isolation are real but modest. I just upgraded to a Samsung S25 Ultra with a 100Mpix 24mm equivalent main camera.

Shooting it against my A7CR and OM5 at 24mm equivalent, I get either OM5>A7CR>S25U or A7CR>OM5>S25U. I can’t agree that MFT is worse than an S25U. My wife recently bought an iPhone 16 Pro and that’s not better than the S25.

Fuji has the advantage that you can upgrade to 40Mpix later and has more jpeg features than the OM5.

I’m not familiar with Fuji, but the OM5 is noticeably lighter and it does have features like pixel shift, handheld hi-res, LiveND, Live Composite, and ProCapture. ProCapture can be handy for getting the moment when your toddler does something without having a huge burst to sort through. Handheld high-res is the only one I use frequently. Starry Sky AF, in-camera focus stacking and HDR might also appeal to you, or not.

Ultimately, lenses probably determine how attractive a mount is.

The OM5 and A7CR are my most carried cameras, depending on what I’m shooting and which lenses I’m willing to carry.

I doubt you are going to regret picking Fuji X over MFT but maybe the reverse would also be true, unless resolution matters. If resolution, DR and lens choice matter, the A7CR is only a little heavier than the Fuji body.

Andrew

 

[yardcoyote]

Fuji. Great jpegs, larger sensor with all the benefits that brings with it, and unsurpassed shooting experience, including the option of traditional "real camera" analog style controls, including an excellent selection of lenses with aperture rings.

 

[NowHearThis]

Starting out from scratch. Looking for a relatively small, lightweight system, the purpose of which initially will be for travel, family vacations, etc. At some point, I may expand into somewhat more serious photography, making this sort of a hobby.

I don’t intend on doing any sports/action photography nor any wildlife, at least the type of wildlife that moves. So basically just stills only, no video, and definitely no street photography.

I’ve spent a fair amount of time looking into both Fujifilm and OM systems. Both offer travel bodies (X-S20 and OM-5) which would suit me fine in terms of their size, weight, and ergonomics. Both systems also offer lenses that would cover the ranges and types that I would be interested in.

Fuji offers their rather unique film simulations, as well as the ability to tweak quite a few parameters that go into making a straight out of the camera JPEG. That appeals to me as I don’t enjoy post processing. OM systems on the other hand, offers some really intriguing computational photography features. Frankly, It’s kind of a toss up for me as to which of those features is more valuable than the other.

Of all the things I loved about my Olympus Cameras, the SOOC images are the best I've ever seen (And I've had: Nikon, Canon, Sony, and Olympus cameras and shot others. The best of the Olympus Cameras was the PEN-F the new OM-3, which has the same front image adjustment dial now beats it because the ISO performance is improved about 1/2 stop over the PEN-F

I’ve reached the point where I’m fairly certain I’m going to go with a Fuji system. Initially, it would be the X-S20 but when I get to the point where I want to get more serious about my photography, they do have the X-T5 or the X-H2.
I’ve handled both of those, or should I say all three of those, at a local camera shop and all would be very suitable for my needs. However, before I make a final decision, I thought I would ask here, whether or not there might be some other advantage that OM systems cameras have over Fuji that I may have missed.

I might add that one of the things that is pushing me towards the Fuji is my understanding that the larger sensor will provide me with better IQ overall and specifically better lower light performance as well as dynamic range.

That is not really correct. The higher MP APS-C cameras will offer a little more detail, maybe a 1/2 stop better low light performance, and only a small about of DR benefits if any - you can checkout Photons to Photos website anything under 1EV will be hard to tell any difference and under .5EV will be impossible to tell.

IQ is not just sensor size and MP, Glass plays a major roll too, I would highly recommend you read at least 4-6 reviews on any lens you are considering. I'd spend more on high quality glass and less on a body. The differences in IQ between M43 and APS-C aren't huge. And there are some features than can make things even closer - for example with my Olympus 12-100 mounted on my EM1.3 at 30mm (60mm equiv), I could get sharp & crisp photos hand held at 2.5sec. At 100mm (200mm equiv) I could get sharp photos at 1/2 sec. That over 7 stops of stabilization and the newer Olympus models over more stabilization than what my EM1.3 had.

If low light is important to you, I'd highly recommend you look to getting a Used Canon R6 II, Panasonic S5II, Nikon Z6II, Sony A7IV. or Even a new Z5II or Z7II (which is an insanely good deal right now @ $2000 brand new) B&H has a bundle with the 24-120/4 (a perfect travel/vacation lens for $3043. 24-33mp FF bodies have outstanding low noise high ISO performance Almost 2 stops better than APS-C/M43 and they offer more DR and most have very good SOOC JPEG color too.

DPR Studio Scene Comparison Tool

You can do your own comparisons but here's a quick example at an ISO I never used, because I think it's too high for either M43 or APS-C... notice how much cleaner the Z5II is. The Z7II is pretty close to that too.

But I suppose the question needs to be asked, how noticeable or significant is this?

Check DPR's image comparison tool first, you can get an idea of IQ vs noise and you can compare RAW or JPEGs

So what does everybody think, am I missing anything?

The only things you didn't list was what glass you were actually considering. Light, Composition, Glass - those three matter most always.

This might upset some, but I won't ever use an APS-C camera again - I've had 5 and no one has lenses that I really like - there are some good ones, but I have issues with anything that is "good or better". Overpriced, too short of range, not wide enough, IQ while good in the centers drops off in the corners, not weather-sealed, and/or I'd still rather have [Y] in M43.

The Olympus 8-25/4, 12-45/4, 12-40/2.8, 12-100/4 lenses are all outstanding. The Panasonic Leica's 8-18/2.8-4 and 12-60/2.8-4 is my all time favorite small camera lenses - they aren't cheap, but the color out of the glass paired with Olympus Bodies is unbeatable. Those on an OM5 II would do most everything - add a prime for low light, and you're done.

*Items in bold are lenses I've personally owned.

One other option you could do what I did and buy a Used Sony A7RIVa ($2229 @mpb) and a new Sony 20-70/4 and you will have unmatched IQ for under $3500. The resolution is overkill for some and some might think it's heavy - but for travel and vacations, you won't need multiple lenses, large bags, etc. I took some pretty fantastic shots earlier in the month on a trip through New England. Most APS-C/M43 and 2 lenses will weigh as much and take up as much or more room depending on the glass (which, I can't emphasize enough to not skimp on).

.

Final Recommendations:

• Fuji XS20 + 16-50/2.8-4.8 - Low cost - B&H has a bundle for $1900. Avoid the 16-80/4 lens if you do buy a Fuji.
• Fuji XS20 + Tamron 17-70/2.8 - More flexible zoom range, reduces need for 2 or more lenses - bigger, heavier put the setup around $2200ish.
• Olympus OM-5II + PL12-60/2.8-4 - will run you about $2150 but this is my top choice in this price range. (You could same money getting the body used, or spend a little more and get the OM-3 and have every bell and whistle available + a small kit. and you can add on the 8-18 or whatever else later on.
• Nikon Z5II + Z24-120/4 (this lens is phenomenal) about $2750 but you get great low light performance. Also Nikon has great colors, especially for skin tones, IMO.
• Used Sony A7RIVa + new Sony 20-70/4 (crazy sharp wide open and I like the wide end more) - the most expensive option at almost $3500. But at the most used ISOs...and standard range lenses, you can't beat details the 60mp sensor and the 20-70mm lens offers.

Thanks, Hal

--
NHT

 

[Mountaingrapher]

I’ve reached the point where I’m fairly certain I’m going to go with a Fuji system. Initially, it would be the X-S20 but when I get to the point where I want to get more serious about my photography, they do have the X-T5 or the X-H2.

[...]

So what does everybody think, am I missing anything?

Thanks, Hal

You can't go wrong with going with Fuji. I'd argue they offer the best tradeoff in Image Quality - Weight - Price tradeoff that you can currently find on the market. Other interesting toss are the Nikon Z50ii and Nikon Z5 II IMHO.

Just to give you some more perspective on the different last gen Fujifilm Bodies:

• The X-H2 and X-H2S are the higher-end, fastest bodies, with features found only in high-end Full Frame bodies (burst rate, buffer, video capabilities...) that are $4000 more expensive. Unless you need that kind of speed, they're a bit overkill and they are significantly heavier and larger than the others.
• The X-T5 is THE photography oriented camera of the moment, incredible value, IQ and great ergonomics: good handling, full direct control, good EVF...
• The X-E5 and X-T50 share the image quality of the X-T5 (and X-H2), but are lighter and smaller. The cons are the simplified control, lack of weather resistance (still good, they're not fragile), and worse ergonomics imho. If you intend to shoot JPEG only, you might enjoy their Film Simulation dial.
• The X-S20 is in-between the X-T50 and X-T5 in terms of size and ergonomics. Its main cons is the previous gen 26Mpx sensor. It is not a bad sensor by any point, but once you taste the magic of the 40Mpx X-Trans V sensor, you can't go back... its big pros are the incredible video specs for such a "cheap body".
• Finally, the 1 lens you'll want to start with is the Fujifilm XF 16-50 f/2.8-4.8. It is a gem: light, WR, insanely sharp and a versatile standard range. Umatched in any other system.

Therefore I'd advice:

• Go with the X-T5 for the uncompromised photography experience
• Go with the X-T50 + XF 16-50 f/2.8-4.8 kit (can be found for less than $1500) if you want to save some weight and money and are ready to accept the compromises.
• Go without hesitation to the X-S20 if you want superior video specs in a still greatly capable photography body.

 

[NAwlins Contrarian]

Harold Godwinson

I'm more interested in what you think of Hasselblad, and what grudges you might hold.

.

.

(For those not much interested in history, Harold Godwinson.)

 

[Harold Godwinson]

I’ve reached the point where I’m fairly certain I’m going to go with a Fuji system. Initially, it would be the X-S20 but when I get to the point where I want to get more serious about my photography, they do have the X-T5 or the X-H2.

[...]

So what does everybody think, am I missing anything?

Thanks, Hal

You can't go wrong with going with Fuji. I'd argue they offer the best tradeoff in Image Quality - Weight - Price tradeoff that you can currently find on the market.

Great post (the one you linked to). It nicely summarizes a lot of what I've been thinking.

At this point, given the replies so far, it's Fuji.

 

[Harold Godwinson]

Out of those two I would choose Fuji, just because you can eventually upgrade to one of their 40MP sensor cameras.

The APS-C sensor will perform better for larger prints.

Yes. Both are factors in my thinking.

 

[Harold Godwinson]

Starting out from scratch. Looking for a relatively small, lightweight system, the purpose of which initially will be for travel, family vacations, etc. At some point, I may expand into somewhat more serious photography, making this sort of a hobby.

I don’t intend on doing any sports/action photography nor any wildlife, at least the type of wildlife that moves. So basically just stills only, no video, and definitely no street photography.

I’ve spent a fair amount of time looking into both Fujifilm and OM systems. Both offer travel bodies (X-S20 and OM-5) which would suit me fine in terms of their size, weight, and ergonomics. Both systems also offer lenses that would cover the ranges and types that I would be interested in.

Fuji offers their rather unique film simulations, as well as the ability to tweak quite a few parameters that go into making a straight out of the camera JPEG. That appeals to me as I don’t enjoy post processing. OM systems on the other hand, offers some really intriguing computational photography features. Frankly, It’s kind of a toss up for me as to which of those features is more valuable than the other.

Of all the things I loved about my Olympus Cameras, the SOOC images are the best I've ever seen (And I've had: Nikon, Canon, Sony, and Olympus cameras and shot others. The best of the Olympus Cameras was the PEN-F the new OM-3, which has the same front image adjustment dial now beats it because the ISO performance is improved about 1/2 stop over the PEN-F

I have actually owned and used Nikon Z and Canon R series cameras (FF). And also, for a short while, I was using an OM-5. I found the SOOC colors from all of them to be really flat. Yes, you can punch things up in post but I'm not really interested in doing that much if at all. After seeing many examples of what comes out of Fujifilm cameras, even with their "standard" film simulation (Provia), they are, to my eye, much richer than the others I've used. And there is the ability to do a lot more tweaking in camera to the JPEG to get the look that I want.

And that's the thing, at this point it's only the computational photography features that, for me, make OM System interesting. I'm not sure that's enough to forgo all the other things.

 

[Harold Godwinson]

Harold Godwinson

I'm more interested in what you think of Hasselblad, and what grudges you might hold.

.

.

(For those not much interested in history, Harold Godwinson.)

I'm familiar with my namesake but I'm not sure I get the Hasselblad reference.

 

[MrAndreas]

For the best (and creative, if needed) SOOC JPG, Fuji wins.

 

[NowHearThis]

Starting out from scratch. Looking for a relatively small, lightweight system, the purpose of which initially will be for travel, family vacations, etc. At some point, I may expand into somewhat more serious photography, making this sort of a hobby.

I don’t intend on doing any sports/action photography nor any wildlife, at least the type of wildlife that moves. So basically just stills only, no video, and definitely no street photography.

I’ve spent a fair amount of time looking into both Fujifilm and OM systems. Both offer travel bodies (X-S20 and OM-5) which would suit me fine in terms of their size, weight, and ergonomics. Both systems also offer lenses that would cover the ranges and types that I would be interested in.

Fuji offers their rather unique film simulations, as well as the ability to tweak quite a few parameters that go into making a straight out of the camera JPEG. That appeals to me as I don’t enjoy post processing. OM systems on the other hand, offers some really intriguing computational photography features. Frankly, It’s kind of a toss up for me as to which of those features is more valuable than the other.

Of all the things I loved about my Olympus Cameras, the SOOC images are the best I've ever seen (And I've had: Nikon, Canon, Sony, and Olympus cameras and shot others. The best of the Olympus Cameras was the PEN-F the new OM-3, which has the same front image adjustment dial now beats it because the ISO performance is improved about 1/2 stop over the PEN-F

I have actually owned and used Nikon Z and Canon R series cameras (FF). And also, for a short while, I was using an OM-5. I found the SOOC colors from all of them to be really flat. Yes, you can punch things up in post but I'm not really interested in doing that much if at all. After seeing many examples of what comes out of Fujifilm cameras, even with their "standard" film simulation (Provia), they are, to my eye, much richer than the others I've used. And there is the ability to do a lot more tweaking in camera to the JPEG to get the look that I want.

And that's the thing, at this point it's only the computational photography features that, for me, make OM System interesting. I'm not sure that's enough to forgo all the other things.

I guess to each their own. My EM1.3 I set the camera to Vivid for everything but photographing people - then I used the Portrait creative style (I find the Natural or Standard settings on most cameras a bit flat, but the DR is better, tradeoffs I guess). On my Pen-F (and the OM-3 will be the same), I could adjust colors independently of each other and get the look I wanted quick; Fall photos in particular looked amazing, I’ve still never seen a camera that can match the colors of the Pen-F (or has half the level of in camera adjustments) with a Panasonic Leica lens attached. Maybe one exists, maybe it’s the OM-3… outside of that…I guess it’s a YMMV thing.

I’ve found that for anything I’m not printing bigger than 11x14” Lightroom Mobile is insanely quick to tweak photos to my liking, if they aren’t perfect SOOC.

I decided to sell my Olympus gear because I wanted one lens and one camera to most everything and the 20-70/4 is unbeatable. Attached to an A7RIVa or A7RV and God-Awesome is what you get. Colors are great, and the latitude in processing (which I know you don’t want to do) even with the JPEGs is astounding. Good luck with your search. Reminder avoid the 16-80 at all costs.

--
NHT

 

[Harold Godwinson]

Starting out from scratch. Looking for a relatively small, lightweight system, the purpose of which initially will be for travel, family vacations, etc. At some point, I may expand into somewhat more serious photography, making this sort of a hobby.

I don’t intend on doing any sports/action photography nor any wildlife, at least the type of wildlife that moves. So basically just stills only, no video, and definitely no street photography.

I’ve spent a fair amount of time looking into both Fujifilm and OM systems. Both offer travel bodies (X-S20 and OM-5) which would suit me fine in terms of their size, weight, and ergonomics. Both systems also offer lenses that would cover the ranges and types that I would be interested in.

Fuji offers their rather unique film simulations, as well as the ability to tweak quite a few parameters that go into making a straight out of the camera JPEG. That appeals to me as I don’t enjoy post processing. OM systems on the other hand, offers some really intriguing computational photography features. Frankly, It’s kind of a toss up for me as to which of those features is more valuable than the other.

Of all the things I loved about my Olympus Cameras, the SOOC images are the best I've ever seen (And I've had: Nikon, Canon, Sony, and Olympus cameras and shot others. The best of the Olympus Cameras was the PEN-F the new OM-3, which has the same front image adjustment dial now beats it because the ISO performance is improved about 1/2 stop over the PEN-F

I have actually owned and used Nikon Z and Canon R series cameras (FF). And also, for a short while, I was using an OM-5. I found the SOOC colors from all of them to be really flat. Yes, you can punch things up in post but I'm not really interested in doing that much if at all. After seeing many examples of what comes out of Fujifilm cameras, even with their "standard" film simulation (Provia), they are, to my eye, much richer than the others I've used. And there is the ability to do a lot more tweaking in camera to the JPEG to get the look that I want.

And that's the thing, at this point it's only the computational photography features that, for me, make OM System interesting. I'm not sure that's enough to forgo all the other things.

I decided to sell my Olympus gear because I wanted one lens and one camera to most everything and the 20-70/4 is unbeatable. Attached to an A7RIVa or A7RV and God-Awesome is what you get. Colors are great, and the latitude in processing (which I know you don’t want to do) even with the JPEGs is astounding. Good luck with your search. Reminder avoid the 16-80 at all costs.

Well, I'm sure that Sony setup is great but it's way out of bounds for what I want in terms of size and weight...

Fujifilm X-S20 w/16-50mm f/2.8-4.8 = 731g
OM-5 w/12-45mm f/4 = 668g

Sony A7R IV w/24-70mm f/4 = 1091g

 

[MrAndreas]

Look at Fuji X-S20 (or X-T50 or maybe X-T30 Mk2) body with the (highly recommended) Sigma 18-50/2.8

Compare this setup for weight and esp. price. And note f/2.8 at 50mm zoom end.

Sigma 18-50/2.8 IQ wide open is nothing to worry about.

 

[tonybelding]

A few thoughts based on my experiences with Olympus, Fujifilm and Panasonic Lumix. . .

What I remember about Olympus was: very fast and responsive camera (like driving a sports car!), horrendous menu system, pleasing JPEG output, excellent Micro Four Thirds lens catalog.

Just a reminder, Panasonic do in fact still produce Micro Four Thirds bodies too. I've never had one of those, but I've had other Lumix cameras that I generally liked. My S1R is incredibly solid and gave the best image quality I've ever gotten out of a camera.

Fujiflm have X-Trans sensor which is debatable value. If you do much post-processing, there are some programs that don't handle it well, and if you pixel-peep sometimes you'll see textures or details that look a bit funky. Fujfilm lenses are very good, but it doesn't have the sprawling lens ecosystem of Micro Four Thirds.

I find Fuji's film simulations overhyped. All camera brands have presets and settings along the same lines, but they can't attach the names of film stocks to them because of trademarks. I can get results that please me better by shooting raw and post-processing, or I can get straight out of camera JPEGs that I find pleasing from Panasonic or Pentax without resorting to a lot of "recipe" tinkering.

Image quality between Four Thirds and APS-C sensor is of no consequence. The size is literally as close as you can get without being the same thing, and in photographic terms, in optical terms, it hardly matters. Your preference for 3:2 or 4:3 native aspect ratio probably matters more.

Be sure and check the specs on the EVF before you buy a body! All EVFs are not the same, and the best EVFs only go into the top-of-the-line flagship cameras. As soon as you start to move down the catalog, it's the first thing the company cuts corners on, and I think a lot of folks don't give this the attention it deserves. An ugly view through the EVF won't make the captured image quality any worse, but it's just the experience of using the camera that suffers.

So after hands-on experience with all of those brands and systems, where did I end up? Same as always, I always experiment with other systems and then end up going back to Pentax.

 

[NAwlins Contrarian]

Harold Godwinson

I'm more interested in what you think of Hasselblad, and what grudges you might hold.

.

.

(For those not much interested in history, Harold Godwinson.)

I'm familiar with my namesake but I'm not sure I get the Hasselblad reference.

That was my attempt at humor based on your namesake's position as the last pre-Norman Conquest king of England, the familial and other relationships among him and various other northern European leaders, the Viking and other raiding and invasions that had occurred, and Hasselblad being Swedish. Alternative history is a tricky thing, but e.g. maybe if your namesake hadn't just fought off an invader who'd married into the Swedish royal family, then he would have fared better at the Battle of Hastings.

Yes, I'm aware that humor usually works better where it's not too complicated. Guess this was a failure of my late-night judgment. Sorry.

 

[NowHearThis]

Starting out from scratch. Looking for a relatively small, lightweight system, the purpose of which initially will be for travel, family vacations, etc. At some point, I may expand into somewhat more serious photography, making this sort of a hobby.

I don’t intend on doing any sports/action photography nor any wildlife, at least the type of wildlife that moves. So basically just stills only, no video, and definitely no street photography.

I’ve spent a fair amount of time looking into both Fujifilm and OM systems. Both offer travel bodies (X-S20 and OM-5) which would suit me fine in terms of their size, weight, and ergonomics. Both systems also offer lenses that would cover the ranges and types that I would be interested in.

Fuji offers their rather unique film simulations, as well as the ability to tweak quite a few parameters that go into making a straight out of the camera JPEG. That appeals to me as I don’t enjoy post processing. OM systems on the other hand, offers some really intriguing computational photography features. Frankly, It’s kind of a toss up for me as to which of those features is more valuable than the other.

Of all the things I loved about my Olympus Cameras, the SOOC images are the best I've ever seen (And I've had: Nikon, Canon, Sony, and Olympus cameras and shot others. The best of the Olympus Cameras was the PEN-F the new OM-3, which has the same front image adjustment dial now beats it because the ISO performance is improved about 1/2 stop over the PEN-F

I have actually owned and used Nikon Z and Canon R series cameras (FF). And also, for a short while, I was using an OM-5. I found the SOOC colors from all of them to be really flat. Yes, you can punch things up in post but I'm not really interested in doing that much if at all. After seeing many examples of what comes out of Fujifilm cameras, even with their "standard" film simulation (Provia), they are, to my eye, much richer than the others I've used. And there is the ability to do a lot more tweaking in camera to the JPEG to get the look that I want.

And that's the thing, at this point it's only the computational photography features that, for me, make OM System interesting. I'm not sure that's enough to forgo all the other things.

I decided to sell my Olympus gear because I wanted one lens and one camera to most everything and the 20-70/4 is unbeatable. Attached to an A7RIVa or A7RV and God-Awesome is what you get. Colors are great, and the latitude in processing (which I know you don’t want to do) even with the JPEGs is astounding. Good luck with your search. Reminder avoid the 16-80 at all costs.

Well, I'm sure that Sony setup is great but it's way out of bounds for what I want in terms of size and weight...

Fujifilm X-S20 w/16-50mm f/2.8-4.8 = 731g
OM-5 w/12-45mm f/4 = 668g

Sony A7R IV w/24-70mm f/4 = 1091g

The Sony setup is amazing, but if you want light.. how about that XT30III - it’s 383g.

For me, replacing a body and 2 lenses - I went down on weight.

--
NHT