Home · Register · Search · View Winners · Software · Hosting · Software · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username   Password

  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  New Feature: SMS Notification alert
  New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist
  

FM Forums | Alternative Gear & Lenses | Join Upload & Sell

1
       2       3       4       5       end
  

Archive 2012 · OM-D E-M5 vs. X100
  
 
goosemang
Online
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #1 · OM-D E-M5 vs. X100


I am perfectly capable of living with just a 35mm lens. I'm interested in functionality and IQ. any thoughts?


Aug 07, 2012 at 11:37 PM
Steve Beck
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #2 · OM-D E-M5 vs. X100


I had a x100 for about 4 days. It just was jot my cup of tea. My local camera store calls it the Kim Kardasian of cameras. Looks very nice but dumb as a rock. I as well as my buddy at my local store had issues with the camera deciding to focus on whatever it wanted. Also back in the early days of the camera it jut seemed to limiting for tweaking.

That being said it may be better now compared to then with some firmware updates. I shoot with some decent DSLR's but am in love withy OMD, it is a fantastic camera with excellent IQ and FOCUSING....



Aug 08, 2012 at 12:01 AM
eric_m
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #3 · OM-D E-M5 vs. X100


Do you want a real optical viewfinder or are you happy with an electronic one?

I have an X100. I've been tempted to get an OM-D, but I can't justify it.

I really like the optical viewfinder on the X100. From reviews I've read, the electronic viewfinder on the OM-D can sometimes be a bit challenging to use with high contrast scenes. That's never a problem with the X100 viewfinder. On the other hand, the autofocus from the OM-D sounds like it is faster than that of the X100, but it also sounds like it isn't up the challenge of focusing on moving subjects. If your subject needs to be still, then focus time is probably not the most important criterion.

The X100 lacks IS, which the OM-D has in-body. If you like to shoot HDR, the X100 only allows +/- 2EV; the OM-D, 3EV.

IQ is fantastic. Can't tell prints from it apart from those I've made with my Canon 1D4. I visited the Grand Canyon earlier this year. For specific photo-activities, such as being there before sunrise, I used the 1D4. For general walking around, and going up and down the trails, I used the X100.

Now's a great time to buy the X100 with the $200 instant rebate. If I had to choose between the X100 and OM-D, I don't know which I'd pick. It doesn't sound like you can go wrong with either. But I'm not willing to sell my X100 to try the OM-D, either.

If you end up going with the X100, I can point you my lens cap solution. I ended up using a Pentax domed hood because I like it better than the Fuji hood.


Eric



Aug 08, 2012 at 12:11 AM
cputeq
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #4 · OM-D E-M5 vs. X100


I can't speak for the X100 because I've never used it, but the OMD is pretty darn good.

As for the EVF - yeah, it's an EVF, but seems less "crushy/contrasty" than the Sony EVF of the A77 (which should be the same as the 5N addon or nex7) and I've had much less trouble using it in bright sunlight than the Sony VF.


IQ on both models seems great, and I'm sure the motion tracking on both models is horrible (I know it is on my OMD at least).

For me, at least, it was pretty easy - the X100 looks great and the IQ is amazing, but the fixed 35mm would eventually bug me, because I'd want to swap to something eventually.

Had I the cash, I'd probably own both.


Edit - I will say this, if there is anything that really bugs me about the OM-D, it's the combination of ISO 200 as the lowest ISO AND the top end shutter speed being only 1/4000s. I run into this limitation when I like to shoot fairly wide open on decently bright days, which will almost require me to go buy some ND filters.



Aug 08, 2012 at 12:35 AM
FlyPenFly
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #5 · OM-D E-M5 vs. X100


There aren't any good 35mm lenses on MFT yet unless you want to manually focus.


Aug 08, 2012 at 01:48 AM
millsart
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #6 · OM-D E-M5 vs. X100


Getting a EM-5 and just using one lens seems to sort of defeat the point of the whole m4/3 system, which is all the great lens. 7-14mm, 12mm f2.0, 25mm 1.4, 45mm 1.8 100-300 zoom etc etc

Not to say that you need every and all lenses of course, but really the lenses selection is one of the strongest parts of the format.

Having had both the X100 and EM-5 though they are somewhat hard t compare.

The EM-5 works basically like a mini DSLR, good EVF, nice flip out touch LCD, amazing IBIS, fast AF, tons of customization etc

X100 is rather more like an old RF camera in its overall control layout and way of shooting. Its got a great lens, amazing IQ, and a cool hybrid OVF/EVF.

Its AF is much improved to date, but still not as fast as the EM-5. It does edge it out in terms of pure IQ, especially at high ISO, however the IBIS does allow the EM-5 to stay at lower ISO's longer (unless you need to stop motion)

Really though both cameras can take fantastic photos so IQ isn't really how I'd choose

X100 has a great built in flash and with its leaf shutter can sync up to 1/4000th, very useful for fill flash. EM-5 needs a clip on accessory and has a normal sync speed. May or may not be a factor

X100 handles a bit better to me as well, but it depends on the lens you put on the EM-5. 20mm 1.7 is pretty small, but I think the EM-5 really needs a grip so its more of a jacket pocket vs cargo pants pocket size

X100 can be had for $999 new

EM-5 is $999 for body only, and then add $300 or so depending on lens you want, 20mm 1.7 would be a nice choice. Also I think the grip is needed and that is $300 as well.

Now your looking at $1600 vs $999. Big difference in price

Also might want to consider something like the Sony NEX7 and a Sigma lens. Great IQ from that combo as well

Another even crazier option is the Sony RX100, which I replaced both my EM-5 and X100 with!

Works for me because I've got plenty of DSLR's for my serious photography work and I wanted something as compact and pocketable as I could find.

RX100 is perfect in that regard because it gives me IQ that an match m4/3 with kit lens but fits into any pocket.

Certainly wouldn't use it as my only camera, but if your looking at something as an alternative just for traveling light or day to day carry its tough to beat.

Its 28mm f1.8 on the wide end as well and really performs nicely as a general snapshot camera in that regard, even in lower light.



Aug 08, 2012 at 02:34 AM
goosemang
Online
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #7 · OM-D E-M5 vs. X100


i actually own the X100, i was just wondering if it'd be worth making the switch. i really like the camera, but a few things bother me. in particular, although my camera is under warranty and had no problems, i'm not sure i trust this thing to take any kind of beating. the olympus seemed like it'd be better in that regard. i've also had it with having to go into fuji's stupid menu system to make some regular changes. (not sure if olympus is any better in that regard) also, AF is pretty good now but the completely garbage MF isn't appreciated.

that said, i asked about the IQ because i think the x100 IQ is fantastic, and was wondering if the olympus was up to that standard

thanks for the thoughts



Aug 08, 2012 at 05:32 PM
millsart
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #8 · OM-D E-M5 vs. X100


EM-5 seems pretty well built, with weather sealing etc mind you, however, the IBIS system is rather new and unproven. Having a sensor held in place by magnetic fields allows the camera to give some amazing "handholdability" but who's to say how rugged and durable that design will prove to be. Could be fine, could start to see issues after 6 months. Simply don't know because all the cameras are so new.

How ironic would it be to give up a perfectly good X100 in fear that something might happen only to have the new camera break down right ?

Really none of the m4/3 lenses, other than using legacy glass, give that great of MF either, they are still all focus by wire.

You could put legacy lens onto it and have a proper focus ring, but the crop factor makes that sort of a pain.

Really if you want good MF ability, the Sony NEX line is the way to go, less crop factor and well implemented zoom and also focus peaking. The NEX7, which will run you about the same as the EM-5 is great for MF with its very high resolution EVF



Aug 08, 2012 at 05:58 PM
vchowdhary
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #9 · OM-D E-M5 vs. X100


Between the 2, I would pick the OMD everytime.

Small, dust/water resistant. Good lens options that are fast and AF accurately.
Can always build the system further if required.
In camera IS
Flip LCD for ease of use if required.
An excellent view finder
Great video mode (compared to the X100 anyhow).




Aug 08, 2012 at 07:08 PM
DTOB
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #10 · OM-D E-M5 vs. X100


I loooove my X100. I don't know that I'll ever give it up.

I did play with an OMD at the local store, and I have tried to convince my wife that it is the camera for her (wink wink), but I don't think she's having it.

I think the RX100 is the next camera for her (me).



Aug 08, 2012 at 07:24 PM
 

Search in Used Dept. 



Makten
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #11 · OM-D E-M5 vs. X100


I had the X100 for a while and liked it, but it didn't fit my style. Now, much later, I have the OM-D and it is everything the X100 wasn't. With a small lens like the Panasonic 20/1.7, image quality is almost the same, but not quite there. Though, if you like strict composing, the EVF of the OM-D is much better. The AF is better as well, even if the 20/1.7 lens is a bit slow.

I also have the NEX-5N with the EVF, and it kills the OM-D in my opinion. Both the viewfinder and the IQ is far superior. But still I like the Olympus better and the IBIS makes up for the higher noise.

The OM-D feels sturdier than the X100 and has better functionality. But if you like the OVF, the X100 is a great camera. I found myself using only the EVF after a while, and came to the conclusion that it wasn't for me.



Aug 08, 2012 at 08:33 PM
Jman13
Online
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #12 · OM-D E-M5 vs. X100


cputeq wrote:
Edit - I will say this, if there is anything that really bugs me about the OM-D, it's the combination of ISO 200 as the lowest ISO AND the top end shutter speed being only 1/4000s. I run into this limitation when I like to shoot fairly wide open on decently bright days, which will almost require me to go buy some ND filters.


If you shoot RAW, I've found that the OM-D has enough highlight headroom that I can easily shoot at ISO 200, f/1.4 and 1/4000s and almost always get all the detail back pulling it in RAW. There may be some really hot spots that stay blown, but those are specular highlights most of the time. Heck, I have even been able to get most of the detail back when shooting at f/0.95 on the Voigtlander 17.5mm in late afternoon sun.



Aug 08, 2012 at 08:54 PM
eric_m
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #13 · OM-D E-M5 vs. X100


goosemang wrote:
i've also had it with having to go into fuji's stupid menu system to make some regular changes. (not sure if olympus is any better in that regard) also, AF is pretty good now but the completely garbage MF isn't appreciated.


What changes are you making? Are you on the latest firmware that allows you to set various features to both the Fn and Raw button? Don't know if that would help or not.

I think the MF is meant to use the button on the back to get close, and then adjust the lens to make fine adjustments. That's not true MF, but it does seem to work better that way.


Eric



Aug 08, 2012 at 11:21 PM
FlyPenFly
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #14 · OM-D E-M5 vs. X100


I would say, overall the OMD has nicer image quality because I can use amazing lenses on it and that will make a far, far better difference than sensor differences for the vast majority of shots.


Aug 09, 2012 at 02:45 AM
chez
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #15 · OM-D E-M5 vs. X100


I've had great success with the X100. Nice and compact, but still not so small that you cannot hold it properly when shooting. Image quality out of this camera rivals the 5d2 in good light. I like the idea of having a fixed lens...puts me into a different frame of mind compared to when I haul around a 5d2 with a mitt full of lenses. I've Nader prints up to 16x20 from the X100 that are wall worthy.

Not the speediest camera, but for what I use it for, travel and street, it fits the bill very nicely.



Aug 09, 2012 at 03:14 AM
goosemang
Online
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #16 · OM-D E-M5 vs. X100


well, I'm convinced to stick with the x100. no IQ improvement is the main thing. don't care about IBIS, changeable lenses and whatnot. gonna stay put.


Aug 09, 2012 at 03:33 AM
Dergiman
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #17 · OM-D E-M5 vs. X100


IŽd wait for X200. Rumors have it announced for Photokina.


Aug 09, 2012 at 06:06 AM
RobCD
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #18 · OM-D E-M5 vs. X100


goosemang wrote:
well, I'm convinced to stick with the x100. no IQ improvement is the main thing. don't care about IBIS, changeable lenses and whatnot. gonna stay put.

I've never really been able to understand this generic use of "IQ". "IBIS, changeable lenses and whatnot" all directly impact IQ.



Aug 09, 2012 at 07:43 AM
goosemang
Online
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #19 · OM-D E-M5 vs. X100


RobCD wrote:
I've never really been able to understand this generic use of "IQ". "IBIS, changeable lenses and whatnot" all directly impact IQ.


it's not generic, it's simply referring to the image quality of a properly exposed, properly focused file. certainly the optical quality of the lens used is important in determining what this will be, but since the 35mm f/2 on the fuji is pretty great i'm not particularly concerned with needing to change it. as i mentioned i don't care about different focal lengths - this is my "street" camera and i'm content with 35mm.

IBIS may make it easier to get a steady shot, but it doesn't change the final IQ. personally i don't really care about IS. i only have one lens with IS on my canon system. i'd probably care a lot more about it if i shot at longer focal lengths. but nowadays with usable ISO 1600, 3200 and beyond it doesn't really matter much. i can go out on the street and shoot at 3200, f/2.8, 1/80 or whatever and get what i need.

so going back to straight up image quality of a properly exposed photograph, it doesn't sound like the olympus has any advantage over the fuji from what folks are saying.



Aug 09, 2012 at 01:49 PM
Jman13
Online
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #20 · OM-D E-M5 vs. X100


Sure, IBIS impacts final image quality. If you're shooting a static subject you can shoot at ISO 400 instead of that ISO 3200 you're talking about now...that has a very direct impact on image quality, especially at night. That said, if you're going to be shooting in decent light more often than not, don't need the faster autofocus, and don't care about anything but 35mm, then the X100 may be the way to go.

However, I used to be the same. I didn't care all that much about IS either, except on a telephoto zoom or something. Until I got the E-M5 and realized I could do night city photography without a tripod and stay at low ISO, or shoot interior ultra-wide shots at base ISO instead of ISO 1600. Plus I get IS on all my adapted longer lenses...my FD 200/2.8 now has 3 stop IS. Now, I don't know if I can go back to having no IS on the body, frankly. But, everyone is different of course.

Edited on Aug 09, 2012 at 01:55 PM · View previous versions



Aug 09, 2012 at 01:52 PM
1
       2       3       4       5       end




FM Forums | Alternative Gear & Lenses | Join Upload & Sell

1
       2       3       4       5       end
    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username   Password    Retrive password