Fujifilm X-Pro1 vs. Olympus OMD E-M5

[ustein]

I bought a Fujifilm X-Pro1 but now having a E-M5 loaner I get second thoughts.

Pro E-M5

- Smaller size for storage and transport
- Lens selection
- AF better
- IBIS
- More snappy in handling
- Less expensive




Pro Fuji

- Larger size for handling (feels more substantial)
- 35mm f/1.4 is nice but Pana 25mm f/1.4 fine too
- No AA filter (not sure the raw converters take an advantage out of this)
- Easier to get shallow DOF
- OVF (which I hardly use because it it not precise)
- Nice JPEGs but Raw is still an issue
- Feels more like a classic camera

Open Questions:

- is the X-Pro1 really that much better at higher ISO?

Please join in with your thoughts.

 

[corposant]

Bigger pixels and sensor on the Fuji...? That's important to some people, I am sure.

Is cost a factor?

 

[Vivek]

I own neither and do not plan to buy either one of them based on the specs.

Sony's NEX-6 is a far better choice for me. I plan to get 2 of those.

 

[ptomsu]

Earlier in spring this years I wanted to buy a Fuji Pro X1 so hard, but could not get one! So I bought the EM5 which I am still happily shooting.

I am actually VERY happy with the Olympus, especially because of the smaller size and the much bigger choice of lenses for m43. I will most probably keep my m43 system as my travel cam, as long as no special requirements are needed, for this I will use my D800E with selected lenses.

I think that Fuji needs some more time to get the X system up and running!

 

[Amin]

Most of the people I know who have both cameras swear by their X-Pro 1. For me, the lack of great support of X-Pro 1 files in LR/ACR is a major problem. I won't shoot JPEG on any camera unless it's part of my mobile phone.

X-Pro 1 seems a fair bit better at high ISO, but I think some of that comes down to Fuji JPEG processing, which has always been very sophisticated. X-Pro 1 JPEGs vs optimally processed E-M5 RAW files is closer competition, with the X-Pro 1 still coming out nearly a stop better, but depending on the application the excellent E-M5 IBIS may make up for that.

For the reasons you mentioned plus diverse choice of lenses with Micro 4/3 (fisheye, super tele, megazoom, etc), I'm not tempted to go from E-M5 to X-Pro 1 or XE-1.

 

[Pelao]

I found that the Olympus was a better camera on paper than it was in use. I just don't like its handling. Too cramped, though I don't have large hands.

M43 certainly has a larger choice of lenses, but I think this is an advantage only if it is relevant to you. If you need a broad range of lenses then sure, it makes sense. But if the current Fuji selection, and the lenses coming over the nect year or so are what you use, then you are covered. Most people I know shoot with a few lenses, and often have a bunch they never use.

I can't really help at higher ISO as I rarely shoot over 1600. I love the Fuji for what it does at lower ISOs.

I find the size issue irrelevant. For me it's the overall bulk and weight of the kit I will likely carry on any given day. Viewed this way, the difference between these two cameras is immaterial.

The AF on the Olympus is certainly snappier. Again, for my shooting it is irrelevant.

So far the RAW issues with the Fuji have not affected me; they are absent for a lot of subject matter.

What I like is the size of the camera, and its overall gestalt / user interface. I rarely need to look at a menu, being able to see key settings at a glance. I also find the OVF marvellous. It took a little work to understand it, but its a beautiful way to shoot and I don't have issues with the accuracy. I also like the EVF, but have yet to find any EVF which comes close to the experience of an OVF.

My biggest love in the X-Pro 1 is the IQ.

The thing is, I really think it's down to personal factors. How do you feel when using the cameras? Which one is more fluid in operation, and gives you the results you need?

It's a very, very long time since I have wanted to use a camera as much as I have the X-Pro 1.

 

[ustein]

>The thing is, I really think it's down to personal factors. How do you feel when using the cameras? Which one is more fluid in operation, and gives you the results you need?


I agree, The main thing which bothers me with the XP1 Raws is the color bleeding.

 

[fordfanjpn]

>The thing is, I really think it's down to personal factors. How do you feel when using the cameras? Which one is more fluid in operation, and gives you the results you need?


I agree, The main thing which bothers me with the XP1 Raws is the color bleeding.

But isn't that primarily a problem with some of the existing raw converters? I would certainly expect that to be resolved eventually. I also have to say that I find the X-Pro1 (and the X100 too) to be a pure joy to use. And the IQ still amazes me every time I use it. But as stated above, it is really a matter of personal preference.

Bill

 

[ustein]

> I would certainly expect that to be resolved eventually.

Fingers crossed.

 

[Braeside]

I have both the X-Pro 1 and the OM-D. I find I use them for different things.

I much prefer the UI of the X-Pro 1. Simple and elegant.

I treat the X-Pro 1 much as my old Leica M8, and my OM-D much as my old Sony A900.

I found the OM-D too small for me unless I added the grip and then it was as large as the X-Pro 1 with its case fitted, so absolutely no benefit there.

Infrared seems to work better on the X-Pro 1, though I need to do more testing there.

Where I would use the OM-D over the X-Pro 1 is fast moving action, telephoto wildlife, travel snaps. So although the OM-D is a very versatile camera, there is just something about the X-Pro 1 which I can't put my finger on, that makes me want to use it more.

 

[dhsimmonds]

I also have both the EM-5 and Xpro1 and having just taken both, each with three lenses on a sailing holiday to the Greek Cyclades Islands, the XP1 was only used for 30 shots as I used the little OMD virtually exclusively.

Analysing my reasons:

* I am more comfortable with a DSLR type camera
* The m4/3rds has a nice range of zoom lenses....I took two!
* OMD far better for action shots, essential when sailing!
* OMD has far faster AF
* I can process OMD raw files in my favourite Capture One Pro software

On the other hand:

* XP1 is far better for land and seascapes and IR
* XP1 is also superior for bokeh, especially with the 35/1.4 lens

Another holiday coming up in January 2013, Caribbean, Panama Canal, Mexico and San Francisco. It will be another headache deciding what to take!

it will probably be both again

 

[Tim]

Hope you don't mind but I am a little off topic here. I have both the OM-D and an X100.

The OM-D is more a "tool camera" for me, a device to get a photographic job done - an assignment camera perhaps, where I may need to choose a lens or other accessory. I've found the OM quite intuitive to use, the OS I learnt quickly, the EVF only just good enough for me. I like the files from the Panasonic 20mm, very HQ. The 14-45 images are good but less so. The OM-D suits my hands almost perfect (they must have modeled it for someone my size) but that may be because I used an OM4 for a couple of decades and the OM-D feels close.

The X100 is more something I will take as a walkabout camera, a machine to help perhaps make an "art" image, a camera I take when I am trying use to "see", rather than a firm photographic task at hand. Its a camera that works quickly and easily as I find the A-mode intuitive - it encourages me to think about aperture/shutter more but delivers fast. The OVF offers a view that encourages me to get the framing right, its more precise, the OM EVF is a bit more guess and hope its gunna be right. I love the files from the Fuji. Even the jpgs are nice IMO and often usable for my needs.

I think they compliment each other, perhaps a X-Pro1 would as well. If I had to choose one or the other, I'd probably have to dump both and buy something else as I could not decide.

Tim

 

[Ario Arioldi]

I also have both. I prefer the X 1Pro for the design and for the OVF.
On almost every other aspect I find the OMD superior (speed, AF, lens choice, raw file usability, weatherproofing), image IQ is equivalent and very much attributable to the used lenses even though at very high ISO the Fuji is in my opinion sligtly better.

 

[Paratom]

I also own both.
Overall I prefer the IQ from the x-pro 1 without having done technical comparisons. I believe one can see that it is a larger sensor.
I also like the handling of the x-pro 1 a lot!
f-stop at the lens, exp comp very fast and all without having to look on the display or the viewfinder.
Different to you I use the OVF quite often when using the x-pro 1.

The OMD I take out when I want to use zoom or tele or need very fast AF.

Sizewise I prefer the handling of the Fuji.

The problem I also use Leica M and the Fuji has many similarities with my M-Leica so I am not yet sure if it makes sense to keep both.

 

[Braeside]

Another holiday coming up in January 2013, Caribbean, Panama Canal, Mexico and San Francisco. It will be another headache deciding what to take!

it will probably be both again

Dave, if it gives you a headache then I can go instead

How did you find your OM-D did versus how the A900 may have?

 

[Terry]

I have both. I prefer the handling of the Fuji better. The controls are in exactly the right spots for me and I just feel more comfortable using the camera.

However, this weekend I was only shooting kids at various sporting matches. I only used two lenses and the OMD and 75mm f1.8 and 100-300mm. These shots would have been impossible on the Fuji. So at the end of the day the OMD can do everything and more than the Fuji - however in the range that I can use the Fuji it is my first choice.

 

[Pelao]

>The thing is, I really think it's down to personal factors. How do you feel when using the cameras? Which one is more fluid in operation, and gives you the results you need?


I agree, The main thing which bothers me with the XP1 Raws is the color bleeding.

Uwe,

Your pros / Cons list makes a reasonable summary of features. Which of the two cameras do you prefer to use?

I understand the frustration around the bleeding. When PP the photographs I care about (my output is print; I don't put a lot online), I very carefully look over my pixels and make adjustments and 'repairs'.

What I also accept though is that there is a balance. There is no doubt that some tiny issues (like CA) don't bother some people, but for me they can alter the print. At the same time, there are some things that won't influence the purpose of the print, which is to reflect what I saw when making the image.

So far, only a few of my Fuji images have revealed issues that I cannot fix and frustrate me in my final output.

 

[jonoslack]

Well, I don't have an x-pro1, so perhaps I shouldn't chip in, but I do have an M9, and for me, they are two quite different animals. The OMD is fast, and really does get the job done - even at high ISO - I like using it as well, but having set it up I rarely venture into the menus.
The M9 has better image quality, a much simpler and nicer interface, and is much more suited to landscape, candid's and photography with 'intent'

I imagine the distinction is the same for the X-pro1, which means that perhaps the subject should be X-pro1 PLUS the OMD!

I think the OMD/M9 co-operate nicely together, I'm sure the same goes for the OMD/X-pro1.

Tom's dilemma between the x-pro1 and the M9 seems a much more difficult decision.


all the best

 

[ustein]

>* XP1 is far better for land and seascapes

Here is where detail loss due to smudging can hurt

>* XP1 is also superior for bokeh, especially with the 35/1.4 lens

Big point for some shots.

>Which of the two cameras do you prefer to use?

The XP1. But also lenses matter and I have no zoom right now for the XP1. I use the 14-54mm 4/3 lens on the OMD and this is a great range.

Yes, the larger sensor shows with the XP1 by showing more smoothness.

 

[dhsimmonds]

Dave, if it gives you a headache then I can go instead

How did you find your OM-D did versus how the A900 may have?

Dave, there are headaches and headaches!!:ROTFL::ROTFL:
OMD/A900.....very much lighter and smaller!

Whilst I still have the A900 (and A77) which are both superb cameras but I think that the A900 will go soon, I still need some more with the OMD..this next trip will I hope determine whether I throw my lot in with m4/3rds and XP1