The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

To those with both the X100 and m43

Roel

New member
Hi there

I have been happy to date with my m43 gear, however, I must say that I am lusting over the X100. Ok, drooling. It is beautiful little camera and from my brief time with it and the images I've seen, it seem like a great camera. I also love the fact I can go totally stealth with it (totally silent operation).

For those of you who have both an X100 and an m43 system, do you find yourself reaching for one camera over the other? I know m43 has more flexibility in terms of lenses, etc., but I did find using the X100 to be quite liberating. And when you work within the quirks of the X100, it can produce really nice results.

So... I would love to hear your thoughts if you could share them with me.

Thanks in advance.

Roel
 

Bob

Administrator
Staff member
I carry the m43 when I intend to shoot with malice and forethought, and the x100 when I am not.
-bob
 

Millsart

New member
It would totally depend what you want to shoot. I had a complete m4/3 system with every panasonic lens they made but ended up selling it all in the end because I found the Sony NEX, followed by the X100 worked better for what I liked to shoot.

So I'd grab the X100 hands down over m4/3, if we were talking about going out with say the GF1 w/ 20mm or the X100. X100 simply handles better, produces much nicer files etc, I think thats more or less a given.

Thing is though that the X100 is a bit limited overall, which again is sort of a given.

If you've got a Gh1 and the 100-300 zoom, and your going to lets say the zoo, I wouldn't expect anyone to grab the X100 in that case. You want the 600mm equiv reach, not 35mm.

Have to ask yourself though how often do you want to do that type of shooting vs how often do you do a style where 35mm works better. Do both bring you equal enjoyment ? Can you afford both or does it have to be one or the other ?

As much as I enjoyed my m4/3 and lenses like the 7-14 and 100-300, I really didn't shoot with them that often, not enough to have a couple grand tied up in the system.

So long answer short, if its JUST a m4/3 with 20mm, then its X100 everytime, its just way more fun to shoot, better IQ etc. If its a full m4/3 system or X100, well then it would really depend on the situation
 
I owned a LUMIX G1 with the kit lens and the 20/1.7. I sold it in order to buy the X100. I also have two D700 bodies so the X100's fixed lens is not an issue.

The X100 RAW files are significantly superior in every way. This is simply due to the physics of Bayer sensors. The X100 RAW files are better than those from my D300 and they are very close in quality to the D700's.

The X100 lens outperforms the 20/1.7 in some areas. In other areas the 20/1.7 is better. Because of the clever in-camera lens correction parameters, the two lenses are dead even in my view. Without the in-camera corrections, the X100 lens outperforms the 20/1.7 by a great deal.

Fly-by-wire manual focus works better with the 20/1.7 - G1 combination. However I use manual focus most of the time with the X100. You may read manual focus is horrible on the X100. It is not.

The X100 OVF is a joy to use. The focus/DOF bar in the display is an important feature for me.. The X100 is whisper quiet. If you prefer manual operation, the X100 delivers. I find the X100 EVF to be superior to the G1's. The X100 flash sync speed is at least 1/1000 sec.

The X!00 menu and operational philosophy is inferior to the G1. The X100 has a much steeper learning curve. Obviously the X100 is not as flexible. The X100 requires a San Disk Extreme Pro card for quick operation. The metering performance is the same for both cameras.

I carry the X100 with me wherever I go.
 

jonoslack

Active member
So long answer short, if its JUST a m4/3 with 20mm, then its X100 everytime, its just way more fun to shoot, better IQ etc. If its a full m4/3 system or X100, well then it would really depend on the situation
Nicely put - excellent

Fly-by-wire manual focus works better with the 20/1.7 - G1 combination. However I use manual focus most of the time with the X100. You may read manual focus is horrible on the X100. It is not.
Do you use manual focus with the OVF? I found that it was really difficult to use as there was no indication as to what was focused on, and no focus confirmation (I do think manual focus worked well in EVF mode). Just interested.
 

John Kraus

New member
Sold GF1 for x100. The one big advantage GF1 has is faster autofocus/shutter release time. You'll encounter if you're shooting sports or fast street shooting moments- quite frustrating with x100 unless you set a very high f stop and lock focus at best hyperfocal distance.
Other then that, x100 takes a bit of time to get used to, but I love it. Great high ISO, coming from Leica M days nice to have option of M style rangefinder.
 

Millsart

New member
Valid points, however would one really shoot sports with either camera ? I make my living as a sports photographer and have tried my GH1 a few times at some games, and while it is a really nice video camera, it couldn't remotely AF well enough for sports. I've really found the AF on the X100 to be quite snappy overall, sort of tracking a running footballer, and while it can sometimes hunt in very low light, so can my others cameras as well, even high end Nikon's. Everyone is certainly a bit different in their perceptions and needs though.

Regarding the shutter release time though, I don't agree with you on that one. I find the shutter very responsive with no lag I can detect. If your shooting in MF mode, and using the AF/AE button to focus, instead of the half press method, the shutter button will always fire the camera instantly.

Not that the GF1 is any slower, but its not any faster either. In fact, I find the X100 to feel just as responsive as my M9 was as well.

Is there perhaps some mode or something with the metering in the menu's that might account for your delayed shutter response time ? From my experience there shouldn't be any detectable lag.


Sold GF1 for x100. The one big advantage GF1 has is faster autofocus/shutter release time. You'll encounter if you're shooting sports or fast street shooting moments- quite frustrating with x100 unless you set a very high f stop and lock focus at best hyperfocal distance.
Other then that, x100 takes a bit of time to get used to, but I love it. Great high ISO, coming from Leica M days nice to have option of M style rangefinder.
 

Roel

New member
Thank you to everyone who replied.

My initial thought was to get the X100 as a general walk around camera, one I will always have with me. I have a GH2 + 20/1.7 (and other lenses), however, I don't feel compelled to take it with me everywhere, even though it is pretty lightweight (compared to my D3 and glass which what I used for paid assignments).

To John et al. who had a GF1+20/1.7 and sold it for an X100 .... any regrets in doing so?

Thanks again for all of the replies!
 

Aaron

New member
Thank you to everyone who replied.
.........
To John et al. who had a GF1+20/1.7 and sold it for an X100 .... any regrets in doing so?
........
I would love to know the answer to this too!

I wonder though, how much does the actual cosmetic looks of the X100 sway people towards choosing it over a Gh2 or Gh1 or similar.... or to put it another way, if the X100 looked the same as a Panasonic rather than a Leica, how many would choose it then purely for its photographic capabilities?

It's just such a good looking camera its hard to be objective about it!
 

scho

Well-known member
Thank you to everyone who replied.

My initial thought was to get the X100 as a general walk around camera, one I will always have with me. I have a GH2 + 20/1.7 (and other lenses), however, I don't feel compelled to take it with me everywhere, even though it is pretty lightweight (compared to my D3 and glass which what I used for paid assignments).

To John et al. who had a GF1+20/1.7 and sold it for an X100 .... any regrets in doing so?

Thanks again for all of the replies!
Roel,

I still have the GF1+20 and for awhile it was my goto walk around camera. Next came a Sigma DP2s which produced superior image quality, but at the expense of ergonomics (great sensor in an inferior camera) - definitely not the best choice for walk around use. I ended up using the DP2s exclusively at ISO 50 on a small tripod before I came to my senses and moved on. Now working with the X100 which is much more to my liking for casual, walk around shooting. Image quality is very good and DR best of the of the three cameras. There are a few quirks, but otherwise no major complaints. I did not like using either the LCD nor the add on external viewfinder on the GF1, so I traded off exchangeable lens capability and excellent, fast AF for the more limited FOV, slightly slower X100 for fast eye level viewing with my choice of EVF or optical finders.
 

Millsart

New member
Looks are nice, but for me, its the viewfinder. I tried the GF1 and just don't like having to hold the camera in outstretched arms to compose on the back LCD. Got the accessory EVF for it and really wasn't impressed. X100 even in EVF mode is much better.

For me though, its all about the OVF, and feeling like I'm still connected to the scene. Viewing through a EVF, even a good one, just feels like your somehow removed, that its not longer reality. Sounds crazy perhaps but with the OVF I feel like the camera isn't there, I'm looking past it and into the scene.
 
Nicely put - excellent

Do you use manual focus with the OVF? I found that it was really difficult to use as there was no indication as to what was focused on, and no focus confirmation (I do think manual focus worked well in EVF mode). Just interested.
Yes, I do use MF in OVF mode. I set all the electronic sounds to off except for the "operational sounds". Operational sounds means menu selection and AF confirmation. Using the focus beep to know when focus is set gives valuable feedback about how the AF system works.

I use no power saving options whatsoever. This increases the AF capture speed.

In MF mode only, the AFL button initiates AF to pre-focus the lens. I look for something with with contrast near where I want focus. In low light it may take a couple of button presses to find a region with suitable contrast. Note: in AFS mode the AFL button locks focus until the button is pressed again or until the shutter is fired. In AFS mode the only way to initiate AF capture is a shutter half press.

When I hear the focus confirmation beep, I look at the focus/DOF bar in the
OVF display. If the focus distance makes sense and if the DOF is wide enough, I recompose as needed and press the shutter. When the subject us close (6-10 feet) and the DOF is narrow, I press the command switch. This instantly enters EVF mode and zooms the display. When the display is zoomed, I can visually evaluate the focus. If the AFL button press got focus close, fine tuning focus using the lens barrel is not a problem. A second press of the command button restores the normal OVF display. Or, you can just press the shutter and take the photo.

In very low light I switch to AFS mode. I use the AF button to reduce the focus region box.

In either AFS or MF mode, when you're looking through the finder, the only reliable confirmation of focus is the beep. Sometimes the focus frame will turn green too. However in MF mode I do not trust the focus frame color change to green as a focus indicator. If you lock focus in AFS mode, the box stays green no matter what. Locking focus in MF mode does not make sense. Focus will only change in MF mode if you press the AFL button or turn the lens collar.

The key to using MF in OVF (or EVF) mode is to pre-focus using AF via the AFL button.

Practice with feedback from the focus confirmation beep will help you figure out how to find a region with suitable contrast for pre-focus.

As the subject distance decreases, parallax error in OVF mode reduces he accuracy of the AFL pre-focus point. Focus adjustment in zoom mode becomes important. This also the case when DOF is shallow.

Sometimes (usually when the subject is close) EVF mode is the only practical way to compose and focus.
 

John Kraus

New member
Valid points, however would one really shoot sports with either camera ? I make my living as a sports photographer and have tried my GH1 a few times at some games, and while it is a really nice video camera, it couldn't remotely AF well enough for sports. I've really found the AF on the X100 to be quite snappy overall, sort of tracking a running footballer, and while it can sometimes hunt in very low light, so can my others cameras as well, even high end Nikon's. Everyone is certainly a bit different in their perceptions and needs though.

Regarding the shutter release time though, I don't agree with you on that one. I find the shutter very responsive with no lag I can detect. If your shooting in MF mode, and using the AF/AE button to focus, instead of the half press method, the shutter button will always fire the camera instantly.

Not that the GF1 is any slower, but its not any faster either. In fact, I find the X100 to feel just as responsive as my M9 was as well.

Is there perhaps some mode or something with the metering in the menu's that might account for your delayed shutter response time ? From my experience there shouldn't be any detectable lag.
Thanks for your feedback. You are right- on manual you can press the shutter and it activates immediately. But the experience in one shot AF is just slow from focus to release. I'd never miss shots with the GF1- I do with the X100. It's not about sports, haven't even tried- it's any fast PJ moment.
But... in most situations AF is fine. Just not quite up to those people in motion instant moments. Wish it were! I've contacted Fuji asking if they can do anything about this with firmware. Only problem I have with the camera.
 

Cindy Flood

Super Moderator
I have both X100 and m4/3. They are very different tools (IMHO). X100 kills my m4/3 cams (G2, E-P1, G1) in image quality. The X100 form allows me to carry it everywhere. I am happy with the 35mm focal length 90% of the time. The m4/3 is there for times when I want to put my Leica M lenses on a digital body or for when I need reach (for instance, the other night at a dance performance.)
I like the looks of the X100, but also like the Oly Pen form. I was not swayed by the way the X100 looks, only by the IQ and size (and past use of Fuji S5).
I have used the X100 extensively for a couple of weeks and have gotten very comfortable with the controls. I am using it in MF in pretty much the manner that Willie_901 has outlined above. I hope that Fuji addresses the firmware, but am very happy with the camera in any event.
If I could only have one or the other, X100 would win hands down.
 

Paratom

Well-known member
I can only speak for x1 vs m4/3 (I have both).
Lately I have carried the x1 all the time, I prefered the IQ regards DR and color and the user interface of the x1.
But these days I have the feeling that fixed 35mm FOV can be quite a compromise sometimes, it works good, but sometimes other focal length can work better (IMO).
Thats why I just have planned to use the m4/3 more often again.
The other difference is AF-speed which makes quite a difference.

So IMO its a lot about the focal length you prefer.
Why not limit yourself to your m4/3 with a 17 or 20mm prime only and see if that works for you.
 

Roel

New member
Thank you again to all who responded. I really appreciate the feedback.

I placed my order for the X100 last night and I should get it sometime next week. I use the 20/1.7 all of the time on my m43 system (it is pretty much glued to the camera body), so I should be right at home with the X100.
 

Amin

Active member
I only briefly owned the X100 before selling it. Compared to the Panasonic GH2, as everyone knows, the Fuji has better sensor image quality. However, I prefer the Lumix 20mm lens to the X100 lens and also prefer the GH2 EVF to the X100 hybrid viewfinder.

If I could only have the one lens, I'd still pick the GH2/Lumix 20 over the X100, because I love the Pana lens and often use it both close up and wide open, conditions where the Fuji lens suffers by comparison. The ability to switch lenses makes the choice even clearer for me.

If there were one thing about the X100 which I could transplant to the GH2, it wouldn't be the sensor performance. I'm plenty happy with the GH2 sensor performance, so the disparity in sensor image quality doesn't mean very much to me. What I would instead love to transplant would be the minimal sound and vibration of the shutter. Such a sweet little tick.
 
R

raymondluo

Guest
I've come to a point where I am cross between the two as well. I have come from an old Nikon, a 5D/ 1DMk2 to the GH1 of which I've given it all up for financial reasons and lifestyle choices.

Right now I hate to bring any camera considered bulky since I don't shoot events anymore and it feels like I'm obligated to if I were to. So I'm crossed between the X100 and the GF1.

The GF1 + 20mm set up is cheaper in the start up but it's a two year old camera with an expensive EVF that's subpar. I use a viewfinder a lot. Word on the street is a panasonic X100-like camera will be coming out. But my guestimates tell me that buying the body will eventually cost about the same as the X100 now. Further that I will want to get a portrait lens etc etc. and it'll all add up.(Since that's the whole point of interchangeability)

If I go for the X100, hardly much is wrong that I can see. One of a kind O/EVF- I'm right in their target market, I'm in line with everything about it. Except video, which I do as a hobby as well. If there was a way to lock exposure or control shutter speed in movie mode. At first I thought since the shutter controls are all external, couldn't it be set through that? Or does the movie mode automatically overrides everything?

Hopefully the new firmware will address that. Since they seem thoughtful enough to allow a 3X digital zoom in video.
 

paparazzi666

New member
Hi there

I have been happy to date with my m43 gear, however, I must say that I am lusting over the X100. Ok, drooling. It is beautiful little camera and from my brief time with it and the images I've seen, it seem like a great camera. I also love the fact I can go totally stealth with it (totally silent operation).

For those of you who have both an X100 and an m43 system, do you find yourself reaching for one camera over the other? I know m43 has more flexibility in terms of lenses, etc., but I did find using the X100 to be quite liberating. And when you work within the quirks of the X100, it can produce really nice results.

So... I would love to hear your thoughts if you could share them with me.

Thanks in advance.

Roel
I have both the x100 and the Ep2. My advise is to have BOTH. THe x100 will be my 35mm focal length. The Oly will be attached with a 25mm Voightlander 0.95 or a C Mount 25mm f1.4 lens.

I would sell the 20mm f1.7 lens to help finance the Fuji. To me the Fuji x100 is like a 35mm summaron lens, its reasonably prices for something that looks and feels so Leica like.

Anyway here are portrait samples shot with
Fuji x100
http://www.flickr.com/photos/paparazzi666/5827860110/in/photostream

m43 with Nokton
http://www.flickr.com/photos/paparazzi666/5804420167/in/photostream

Life is too short to miss out on the really FANTASTIC experience of shooting the x100 with EVF and OVF mode. If it doesnt work for you, the camera would probably sell off easily and you probably would have FREE use of the camera...haha.
 
Top