The Singapore website Hardwarezone (Click here) published a full Olympus E-M5 review. The camera earns nine points out of ten: “We could list its specs: 16MP image sensor, 5-axis image stabilization, weather-resistant body. We could tell you how well the camera handles with the twin control dials, quick AF speed and easy AF point selection. We could wax lyrical about its gorgeous, retro-inspired look. We could look at its images’ beautiful colors and remarkable high ISO performance. But it’s when these elements are brought together that something altogether new is born: Charm. Any photographer would be hard-pressed not to have fun shooting with the E-M5. The mostly well-placed controls let you give it swift commands which are promptly obeyed. Its quick and accurate auto-focus, together with the excellent image stabilization and image quality at higher ISO speeds, conspire to help you catch the most fleeting of moments.”
Ok, we already know the E-M5 is a great camera but how does the image quality compare with the best of its class, the Fuji X PRO 1? Yesterday I published a probably not so fair E-M5 versus X PRO 1 image comparison at MirrorlessRumors (Click here). You can click that link to see the image of the full ISO comparison: http://i.minus.com/igOc5QWXHZSII.jpg. It’s not so fair because the E-M5 shots were taken with the kit zoom lens while the X PRO 1 used the very likely much better 18mm f/2.0 prime lens. So don’t care too much about the sharpness while noise will not be so effected by the lens quality. What do you think?
E-M5 preorders (Click on the names of the stores to see the product page):
Black E-M5 body at Amazon, Adorama, BHphoto, J&R, Warehouse UK, Digitalrev and Amazon Japan.
Silver E-M5 body at Amazon, Adorama, BHphoto, J&R, Warehouse UK, and Amazon Japan.
Black E-M5 body with 14-42mm lens at Amazon, Adorama, BHphoto , Digitalrev and J&R.
Black E-M5 body with 12-50mm lens at Amazon, Adorama, BHphoto, J&R, Jessops, Amazon UK, Amazon Deutschland , Digitalrev and Amazon Japan.
Silver E-M5 body with 12-50mm lens at Amazon, Adorama, BHphoto, J&R, Jessops, Amazon UK, Amazon Deutschland and Amazon Japan.
113 Responses
The Fuji 18 mm isn’t so great, is it? According to the test Mirrorless Rumours linked to, it’s really sharp only in the center.
Regardless, its better than the 12-50 at any focal length or ratio.
Not when its raining…
Or 50% of the time when its out of focus…
I wonder how big is the crop of the comparison. Closing up like this, the noise of the EM5 seems way more obvious. While the x pro 1 deliver fairly good ISo performance.
“Charm”; that’s an excellent summary!
Then go and watch the Fuji Pro over on DigitalRev. http://youtu.be/TpW2N5qAtP0
Scrappy design features, ugly brick of a camera with unreliable focus. Never mind how good the IQ is; I reckon shooting with it would be a charmless experience.
I took something completely different from the DigitalRev TV “test”: Kai liked the camera. Before I was not interested, after the review I am. Like the “charm” they talk about the E-M5.
But Kai also said the 18 and 35 are not that sharp as lenses go.
And the AF seems to be very slow and sloppy.
It’s charming!
It’ll make YOU charming if you buy it!
Well, most of you anyway.
Seriously ? Isn’t shooting about the fun of it ? Where is the fun if the focus is shat, the manual focus useless, many many quirks all over the place, bigger than it should be, and worst of all, average lenses at best. Nothing but agony, all your savings worth of agony.
Received my xpro1 on Thursday, it’s a complete joy to use, AF is fast in good light and the IQ is FF good.
I would like to see this comparison done with prive vs prime. LIke the Pany/Leica 25mm f/1.4 vs the Fujinon 35mm f/1.4.
I would like to see the exposures balanced to my eye (not the camera settings being the same).
I would like RAW files.
And I would like them large enough so that I can actually see something.
In short…give me the BEST from both cameras and let me see what I am dealing with here.
These image comparisons are meaningless to this photographer.
This is kind of a silly comparison (apples to oranges)..BUT (LOL!) I would love to see what the actual difference is in “real” image quality from ISO 200-1600. I rarely shoot out of that quality zone…
Even if the X-Pro 1 is superior in image quality, this is not my only hot button.
Fuji fails in flexibility and usability.
Fuji fails in mobility.
To me, each of the two above are deal-breakers.
And by the way, Fuji fails in affordability.
I agree…but if it did all these things well it would be worth the price.
Well only if, but it didn’t happen.
Up to now Fuji fails to build such a camera.
X100: serious flaws at start, several FW updates necessary to make it usable.
X10: strange IQ artifacts
X-Pro 1: clunky, too small view finder, superfluous OVF, slow AF, bad handling
excellent IQ paired with poor design
Fuji is in the retro trap. Why can’t they design cameras, which feel easy in one hands and which have appropriate grip for the heft. The third consecutive fail in camera design is a bit much.
Retro is OK….but it has to have Retro Looks with modern performance…not retro performance. The OM got that right.
Fair, or not. As it comes to the image quality, and noise the winner is Fuji X-1 PRO. It’s clear and obvious.
true….but fuji seems to release handicaped products….awful AF among other annoying things….
Yeah the AF is the only real reason i’m not going for the Fuji, I was super excited at first, it’s got my name all over it, but then they cripple it, I made do with the AF on my E-P2 when all mirrorless were slow, I don’t want to spend that kind of money on something so slow and such bad MF, worse than the E-P2 by a mile.
It is the slow af speed and the very steep price tag that keeps me from buying a fuji x-pro.
Too bad i can’t get the olympus M5 body only here in austria…
What is the problem with Austria? Just buy it there, or somewhere else.
The AF in the xpro1 is better than the x100 and better than stated in the digitalrev review. It struggles in low light, but so does every other CDAF camera I’ve used. Speed isn’t really a problem, it’s more that AF can be inaccurate.
hey…give me the OM with a pocket full of primes any day. The Fuji, as usual has waaaaaaaaaaaay too many quirks and is extremely limited in lens range and capability. Plus..I think it has image “smear” in every photo I have seen from it so far…so I don’t know what is up with that, (NR??????) Film-like..but not sharp-sharp….(too bad..it had potential)… I am shooting pictures today, so give me a quick, versatile camera with a full lens range and great image quality. Looks like the OM fits that bill and so a lot of other cameras. The Fuji is just to limited. Its mostly for Yuppie weekenders and vacationers…so it has its place!!!!!. 🙂
They could have used a sharper lens for higher detail resolution than the 12-50. Maybee that would have changed the verdict a bit?
Yep,
Unlike the highly paid professional photographer you are, Zack Arias, for example, is weekender Yuppie. HA! In fact if you actually take the time to look at the reivews of the X Pro and the people using it you’ll find the IQ on this camera is significantly better than any MFT system, and not by a small amount. I use MFT, X series cameras, and FF cameras (currently D3). I have a D800E on pre-order and an X Pro. The X Pro is as close as you will get to FF without being a FF camera. You are kidding yourself or self delusional if you think that MFT can approach this camera in terms of IQ. The bells and whistles on the Olympus are for the “weekenders” who really need all the help to use a camera.
Wow, you really went overboard on this one!
Yeah, he’s a douche. But what to expect from ranting fanboys when someone besmirches their toys they (having to other life) identify with.
Lol@JSB, get a life man…
Nice to have nothing to do with your money than satisfy the ego on more-bigger-latest neck apparel. Do you actually use them or just wear them to the beach?
If you shoot mostly at ISO 3200 or higher, XPRO1 is your choice. To me, almost all of my shoots are between ISO100 to ISO500, so I don’t see any obvious reason why I should invest a lot more in XPRO1 in order to gain better ISO performance but sacrifice camera performance. It’s so simple to me.
If you print at 13 x 19 will see a difference, even at ISO 200. If you are posting little files on the internet then maybe no. I print. I would not use a MFT camera for anything bigger than 8 x 10.
I’ve seen prints that are 20 x 30 and they look great
Really, how do you know?
JSB…that is pretty funny…I sell 13×19 prints in a couple of galleries, regularly…..and some of them are from my GF1.. So what is your reference point…
If I compare the MFT image to a FF it will not be “AS” good…but if the image is solid…MFT to 13 x 19 is so acceptable…if shot at low ISO…definitely.
Wow, you’re just a total troll (being extra polite here), aren’t you? You apparently have no regard for facts when it comes to what comes spilling off your keypad. Go back to Fujiland where you’ll assuredly find a way to tick them off as well, seems to be your nature.
And I like Fuji!
Of course! Were you expecting something different? The point though is that the OM-D performs very nicely for what it is.
… and with the 12-50 at that.
Otherwise, one can think that they try to compliment the 12-50: they compare it to a prime 😉
That too 🙂
I really want to see a real person who preferred X Pro 1 over E-M5 even if they would have the same price.
The only argument for X Pro 1 is the outstanding image quality, otherwise it’s a so-called retro, but actually ugly, slow, big, unergonomical camera with very limited lens selection and stll full of firmware bugs.
Unergonomical? Its designed the way cameras were desgined before cameras turned into gadgets.
Slow? ….slower compared to omd for focus…. But that is subject based on what you are shooting…
Ugly? Again subjective…..a nice tip of the hat towards to contax g systems and fuji rangefinders of the past…..i dont think it reminds me of the m9 at all….. Except they are both rectangular?
Limited lenses selection? Not with the plethora of adaptors. And really the three primes they give suit many needs for this type of camera.
And i would pay over a thosand dollars more just to be able to use my other lenses in mf…. And not having a mft sensor. Its not just image quality its dof.
Going from a fuji 6×9 to a d700 to a d7000/x100 the dof of field differs 1.8 at 35 on my d700 does not equal same dof at 1.8 at a 35mm 1.6x crop.
But to each their own.
Have you ever held a range finder ir range finder style camera. Yes xpro1 is not a range finder….but you shoot with it in a very similar way….
Em5 looks great. But ill only be purchasing one for hiking, trips with weather issues, the beach etc.
Just don’t forget that cameras “before turned them into gadgets” were designed according to their technological limits. By example, the shutter button, the dials, the wievfinders were positioned on the mechanically best places instead of the ergonomically best ones. You wouldn’t contradict that.
If film cameras was really better than nowadays’ digital cameras people would still use them instead of the so called gadgets. But it’s definitely not the case.
Apropos MFT and MF lenses. My brightest lens is an Auto revuenon 55/1.4 at this time. But after buying the Oly 45/1.8 I’ll never touch MF lenses again! Time to get rid of plenty unsharp images due to lack of AF. And I haven’t ever heared any 45/1.8 user claiming that the DOF this lens can offer wouldn’t be enough shallow.
90 3.6 is not enougH shallow for me
Strange. Because that is shallow enough to consistently miss the focus.
Please tell me a bit about the fullframe body and fullframe lens combination you’ve kept trying the shallow DOF with.
> Unergonomical? Its designed the way cameras were desgined before cameras turned into gadgets.
Some things get better, some think they can stay the same and go on sucking.
> Limited lenses selection? Not with the plethora of adaptors. And really the three primes they give suit many needs for this type of camera.
Well, with an AF that bad going manual focus might be an improvement.
> Its not just image quality its dof.
dof is mostly a crouch for unskilled douchebags who think every shot must have at least 80% bokeh.
> But to each their own.
I agree.
“…who think every shot must have at least 80% bokeh.”
Please stop misusing that term. This is pure heresy.
You are talking about OOF blur, not bokeh!
Bokeh is the *quality* of the blur, how OOF objects are blurred, how the blur looks, how it’s rendered. I.e. if CA is created on OOF contrast details, how OOF specular lights look etc. Stop this heresy, and stick to the right terms. OOF blur by means of shallow DOF and bokeh is NOT the same.
“The only argument for X Pro 1 is the outstanding image quality”.
It is quite a big argument though. I would gladly sacrifice AF for IQ, for example.
Under these circumstances I wonder what are you doing in a 43 discussion forum.
Geez, everybody seems on the edge today! I can be on whatever forum I want. Or is this forum reserved for some specific kind of thinking?
I don’t understand this camera ditching that is going on. It depends on people’s needs and that is what I tried to say with my very obvious comment. There will be people who will prefer the Fuji even if it was the same price as the OM-D. And, no, I am not one of them.
Yes men , fast af is really important, i prove all those new fuji cameras, x100 and x10 and DAMN THAT AF IS REALLY SLOW , there’s a times when u need focus in manual or use the af but, the AF IS IMPORTANT , and well man is u like the fuji x pro COOL , but TRUE IS TRUE , IS REALLY HARD TO USE AND 000000000 ergonomical-unlike the EM5 , PLUS WITH AN EM5 i can buy AND ADAPTADOR FOR OLD LENSES( 15€), and an excelent 50mm 1,8 for (50€) , and have a territic lensen for let me think mmmm 70€ ,( due with the stabilization system in the body of the em5 and all the olympus) , THAT IS SOMETHING
U CANNOT DO IN A FUJI PRO ^^
Think ’bout it xddd
Never again. I missed way too many images because of a crappy AF. Better less quality and getting the shot than better quality and everything out of focus. Highest quality is ok for the studio where you can just retake the shot again and again, but outside compromises need to be made.
+1000000000000000
+10
That’s a bit like saying a car is a fantastic drive but you still hate it. I have no doubt the EM5 is going to be an excellent camera, but the xpro1 is a different class. The images really are close to FF quality. I didn’t expect them to be as good as they are. The Camera looks pretty nice too…
In term of detailing , no doubt X pro will thumb it as the innovation sensor really make a different . I have tested X Pro in a fair , the only set back is it’s auto focusing speed , not my standard . Hopefully Fuji can rectify it ASAP as for EM5 , it’s another excellent camera but I will unlikely to get it as I have owned a GX , will looking forward for it’s next product . A Pro Olympus camera example .
uops… @ kesztió: +1
Great review.
The X-Pro 1 is cleaner by a stop or so, as expected. E-M5 is useable up to ISO3200, perhaps a notch more, which I’d be happy with for the rest of my life (please don’t start with nominal vs. effective ISO ratings. Not interesting).
Sensor efficiency (size/performance) of the E-M5 is as good as the Nikon D4. And both make the Sony 16MP sensor outdated (yes, the one used in the D7000, NEX-5n, K5, etc…). That is pretty incredible, so I don’t think that anyone can complain about the sensor anymore.
The Fuji X pro should be in the same league as the E-M5 and D4 when it comes to efficiency of the sensor (or even a bit above).
Ummm I’m not sure that we can compare like that.
I just came across the D4 report at DXOmark. They recently announce D4’s test score which gets second best overall score in DXOmark history, just two points behind Phase one IQ180 (medium format camera).
http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Publications/DxOMark-Reviews/Nikon-D4-review/Sensor-performance
+ 1. In fact the E-M5 is quite impressive by past standards. And up to 3200 it looks even sharper.
Strangely, for a camera without the AA filter the X Pro 1 needs some sharpening.
the OLY lens 12-50mm is quite long ;o/
Yes that lens is big. Now imagine it with the ultra expensive and optional lens hood. I’m not liking this lens in any way.Just misses the mark all round for me. I’ll stick with the primes and panny 14-45 for kit zoom and keep my EPL2 for now till the prices come down.
No, it is “charming” like the leaning tower of Pisa. I for one will be getting the disposable 14-42 for $100 and then get something smaller and faster. Then use the $100 lens for my GF-1 to give to my GF:)
I wonder how many people here have used a Fuji X product. I’ve had an x100 for a few weeks now. Its “quirky”, but that’s it, nothing as terrible as most people think. The AF is not DSLR like but easily in the category of a GF1, which is good enough for the kind of shooting these cameras are designed to.
Would I prefer faster AF? Sure I would! Would I say the cameras are unusable due to their current AF speed? Not at all! And:
-The image quality is amazing. What beautiful colors and sharpness!
-Its super discrete (my GF1 slaps like a big dslr!).
-The tactile feeling is just great – I have a GH2, and for all its technological goodness that camera has never managed to excite me due to its plastic feeling and lack of personality. If you’re an utilitarian kind of photographer, then this is of no importance, but if you need some sort of connection with the gear, some kind of inspiration, then I bet you’ll like Fuji X.
As it has been said: the Fuji X are no jacks of all trades. If you want an all-around camera that can shoot sports, PJ, landscape, and who-knows-what-else, it is not for you. If you’re the kind of guy that places too much importance on AF speed tests, it is not for you. If you have reasonable questions on whether it is the right camera for you – chances are, it is not for you. 🙂
My 2cents.
Do you think the Fuji is worth its price given that it has the best in class IQ and all the quirks that come with it?
+2
I’ve handled it for 5 seconds only. From a tourist at work. But as a GH2 owner, I get the idea. It feels solid.
The 2 different textures of fake leather side by side is everything but aesthetical.
The best thing this review does is finally showing us a good real life comparison of the DR of the sensor, it’s only jpg and not at base ISO, but you can clearly see the X-PRO1 having more DR in the chapel picture, the painted windows highlights are blown in the EM-5 and are more properly balanced in the X-PRO1. i think it’s about 1EV difference.
not bad i guess, though i’d prefer if it’d be comparable. still waiting on the DXOMARK tests
Canon’s mirrorless: AE-D
http://www.petapixel.com/2012/03/22/canon-ae-d-mirrorless-camera-concept/
Ha! Looks strangely familiar.
Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery. 😀
http://davidriesenberg.com/archives/262
Eh? Flattery? The text states that it is a concept study by an industrial designer/photographer, and has no relationship to Canon! OK — perhaps flattery that an industrial designer on his own initiative makes something slightly similar to the OM-D…
This is the best looking on of the bunch…just needs a RF-Style VF Even if the top needs to be slightly larger or in a NEX-7esque kind of way…….its ok…
http://davidriesenberg.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/AE-D_NVF_3QR_F-500×281.jpg
Now THIS is something truly interesting:
http://cargocollective.com/iovokitangra/Snima-Iris-concept-camera
Not a copycat and not derivative.
I like it!….Canon no makey tho.
What imitation? It’s the same concept from the same guy.
Taking all aspects is consideration E-M5 is the big winner!! No doubt!
If PL 25/1.4 was in front of O-M, results could be different…
I know the E-M5 has not even been released yet but any rumors on when we might see some new Pens or an XZ-2? 🙂
…when will we see the successor of the E-M5??? Any rumors on that? 😉
It is true that em-5 is clipping highlights in the painted windows more than the xpro-1 but if you download the whole pictures and compare them, the em5 is actually looks better in the darker areas in the ceiling of the church. link:
http://www.dcfever.com/articles/news/2012/03/120322_fuji_om_14o.jpg
http://www.dcfever.com/articles/news/2012/03/120322_fuji_om_13o.jpg
The em5 also process Red flowers better than xpro-1. Or it could be Oly kit lens macro is better than the fuji 60mm macro lens.link:
http://www.dcfever.com/articles/news/2012/03/120322_fuji_om_11o.jpg
http://www.dcfever.com/articles/news/2012/03/120322_fuji_om_12o.jpg
In exifs the image in the church is the e-M5 +0.30 EV and thus brighter …
I had a X-Pro 1 in my hands and must say: no, thanks.
The camera is not really a charm, only absolute retro fans could possibly say this, and the black surface feels anything else than retro. But that is only minor.
The main thing is that the camera feels clunky, not comfortable in hands. For its relative large size it has not enough grip, because Fuji is playing the retro line too much and without necessity. The control wheels aren’t optimal to reach and, honestly, the finder is disappointing. The OVF is super(fluous) and the EVF too small, especially in comparison to the GH2.
Worst thing is the AF. It is slow and pumps and hunts – terrible.
So, as it is, the X-Pro 1 is – especially for its price – a hyped piece of overpriced equipment for collectors.
In comparison, in all attributes except IQ for a small margin, the EM-5 is a much superior choice. It is better designed, better build, performs better, has more native lens choices, better handling, and likely a better view finder.
So, what was again the reason to buy a X-Pro 1 ?
+100
Nostalgia! 🙂
Well, I don’t know if you have hold the X-Pro 1 in your hand already. But I would call the the design pseudo-retro at best. The feel just isn’t. So anyone who likes nostalgia will be disappointed.
Errrr. No it doesn’t. The AF, which is quick, doesn’t hunt, not except a little in very low light. It feels great in the hand and looks fabulous. I assume whatever you played with was preproduction firmware.
I’m not sure why there is a need to knock the xpro1 in praising the EM5.
X-Pro 1 feels as great in hand as piece of wooden plank. I was actually surprised how bad it felt for its size.
In a shop with good light, the camera hunts and pumps. No reason to deny that. It wasn’t low light and it was a production camera.
Although it is personal taste, I can’t imagine how such a gripless brick can feel nice in hands. Even if it does so for you, most other system cameras should at least feel better in your hands.
Fuji plays the retro drama too much neglecting camera body ergonomics completely. The dials and buttons too often are not there where you need them and too small. Compare the flat, uncomfortable to reach shutter speed wheel of the X-Pro 1 with the mode dial of a GH2 or the two wheels of the EM-5, then you get the difference between good and average ergonomics.
WHEN DOES IT COME OUT?????
E-M5 is a better camera and system than Fuji, Sony, Samsung or any other mirrorless camera (other than Leica of course) – if you want better quality than the E-M5, then buy a D800/D700 or 5D MKII/MKIII.
“while noise will not be so effected by the lens quality”
would lower sharpness improve the noise by blurring?
I hate that the Hardwarezone sample photos list lens details as 35mm equivalents, rather than the actual focal length and F-stop that they were shooting at.
I took a look at their Canon 60D and Nikon D7000 reviews, and they aren’t listing lens details as 35mm equivalents, so why the fudge are they only doing this for the Olympus E-M5 ???
This really p*sses me off.
What do I think?
I think Olympus should have developed a lens worthy of the E-M5. The ethos should have been quality, quality, quality. Instead we got a jack-of-all-trades, average image quality kit zoom that just seem too large for what you get. We should have had the option to pay for a mid sized, high quality zoom that covered a much more modest range.
If the E-M5 had come with a medium sized high grade zoom, something in the range of 12-35mm f/2.8 – they could have sold the kit for $1500 and we would have been wetting ourselves to pay.
Sure everyone would buy this, a kit worth >$2000 sold for $1500. But I’d assume Olympus would go out of business giving 50% rebates on >$1000 lenses.
Nicwalmsley, I think you don’t get it that Oly is aiming at large sales, with high IQ included. The 12-50 is probably v. good as a jack of all trades.
You don’t have to buy it. Oly and Panny already provide outstanding lenses.
But the OM-D must stay within a price bracket, and price, for what is provided is excellent.
Oly needs sales, it is not into male jewellry like Fuji. It’s a bottom up approach, not a top down one, which ruined them, with 4/3.
Boooohooohooooo, the omd got à good …beating. Get over it and used to it. The mushy pictures from the little sensor will give so so results. And yes the omd is à Nice camera with Nice features. But still is 4/3……..
No-one in their right mind has doubted that there are better sensors than that in the E-M5, and most have suspected that the sensor in the X-Pro1 is better — based on the excellent sensor in the X100. And there are better sensors than both of these, I suspect: the sensor in the almost 4 year old D700 is, according to my eyes, one stop better than that of the X100.
Almost every reader of 43 rumors are interested in the combination of a good (enough) sensor in a small body with small and high quality lenses. Except those one-eyed ones who think that it bothers us that one camera is better than the m43 cameras in single categories.
So the X-Pro1 has a better sensor? I am happy for Fuji because of this; personally I like Fuji. And I think everyone should choose camera based on their own needs. If your need is an excellent sensor, go for it. But if you think it bothers most of us on the 43 rumors group, forget it. As long as the m43 sensors make progress and are relatively close to competitors, the other parameters will more than balance a slight inferiority in a sensor which is good enough.
+1
A better sensor doesn’t mean a better camera for you.
well said
I would love to have an EM-5 with the Fuji X-Trans sensor.
Since that is highly unlikely,… 🙂
Amen to olympus em5
From my experience with my gf1, shooting with a bright prime always gives lower grain than shooting with a small aperture zoom.
I have the 20mm f1.7 and the 7-14mm f4 panasonic lenses, and i often compare their images at high ISO.
So in my opinion, its not a very fair comparison.
Perhaps using the olympus 12mm f2.0 on the EM-5 would be more fair.
+1
To compare the 12-50 to a Fuji prime lens is a horrible comparison. Use the 20 mm and the results will be far different… The site conducting the comparison must be paid by Fuji, clearly….
In the real world I don’t think anyone will need to go that high with ISO. It has IBIS which will help a lot with stationary subjects. For street and travel photograghy this will be a treat to use.
It is an amazing achievement for m4/3 and having it compared to top offerings from APS-C cameras says alot.
I wonder if Admin has any news about the long-rumoured Olympus modular system? I was thinking about it before and it would make sense if such a design was what they were going after “pro” wise.
I think it already happened. OMD is the modular digital OMX. If you think about it. Modular grip, lens, body, viewfinder (in pen), and modular a lot more with the accessory port.
I think you people are all idiots and there’s no way you can compare those cameras simply because those cameras are not out yet.No ones opinion count but mine because i have time to form better opinions because i have a sad sad life. I even use other peoples names to smear them so if anyone here has mistrust about who says what here, it’s because of sad little angry kunts like me.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G7OWV6iM7tg
OMD… Olylclubph.com
Frankly if you look at the Chinese samples provided here, you will notice one stop difference after 3200. That stop difference is more than compensate by the *4* stop difference provided by IBIS.
Honestly, I am looking for someone to explain when and where I should use 12800.
There is another factor: all the X Pro I samples i saw so far are not very sharp, and the same is true for the black lines in the Chinese samples. It would be interesting to know what is the compared max lpmm of the two cameras. Again I know how sharp can be Oly Jpeg at defaults so I don’t worry at all, With the X Pro I I don’t know.
It might be a matter of lenses, of the new pixel arrangement. Many things can screw up. People still don’t understand that in Oly case it was not the bodies that were holding back CDAF, but the lenses. So that actually you can retrofit the old bodies with the new lenses and get fast CDAF.
But imagine doing that with Fuji: you should first chuck the first gen expensive lenses? This is a very real concern, born of the lack of experience with CDAF.
Building a system top down is very arrogant, because a user risks a lot of money. Panny and Oly, wisely chose the opposite approach.To me the only loss in 3 years was the old 14-42 kit lens. With Fuji you could end up losing a lot more money.
Funny that people don’t seem to think in a practical way about system cameras, but in an onirical way instead, as if a camera should materialise their wishes by magic.
Let’s keep down to earth!
4 stop ibis please…………. And Ibis works only if youre subject is not moving . So thats nice fore buildings etc and not for real shooting. Buildings i can shoot at iso 100 with a tripod. O no Olympus does not have iso 100. etc etc etc etc. Yes the OMD is going to be a fine camera but still a 4/3 with some gadgets. And no it is not better than de Fuji/NEX etc.
Or you might miss the shot entirely of a moving subject while using the Fuji with its slowwww AF speed.
These things are just cameras. Quit being such dorks.
The Fuji looks fantastic and has outstanding image quality. On the downside, the reviews claim the AF is slow and unreliable. As great a camera as it is, that would be a deal killer for me. But looks wise it’s the best looking camera on the market today, bar none.
The E-M5 is another great looking camera, a close second to the Fuji, if you like that retro look (I do). The image quality seems outstanding, for what it is. The reported fast and accurate AF makes it a winner.
As much as I’d love to pick Fuji, I think I’d have to go with the E-M5. Plus, it’s pretty small and would make a great carry-around travel camera so I don’t have to lug around my professional DSLR all the time.
It’s funny how people try to make the OMD-5 something it isn’t. Both are great cameras, both have pros and cons. Need image quality above all else- get the Fuji- price is irrelevant. You are on a budget and can’t get the Fuji? Get the OMD-5, ultimate image quality is irrelevant.
It all depends on what each individual needs and wants, and it doesn’t make the other option bad.
I think the keyboard warriors need to re-assess some of their comments. I doubt most have handled both of the above camera’s – therefore, labeling the X-Pro’s AF as ‘terrible’ or ‘atrocious’ is jumping the gun there. I take the web reviews I read with a pinch of salt, a lot of it is hyperbole. Ken Rockwell is a prime example, he’s there to invoke a response from readers. Hence why he’s a love or hate him kind of guy. I’ve tried the X-pro in store. Reading these glorified web reviews has me wondering. One critic mentioned the controls “awkward” after…wait for it, an hour. Being a predominant Pentax and Nikon shooter I also found it awkward, but that is what constant use envokes – muscle memory. The AF is on par or just slightly faster than a GF1. When it locks on though it’s spot accurate. There is nothing awkward with the controls or feel..again, judged on my preference. Purely preferential based on what you like, how big your hands are and so on. The JPG’s are sublime. What it gave after my time with it was a constant grin on my face, the pictures are fabulous straight out of the cam – I could see myself saving ALOT of time post production with this. The 18mm isn’t so sharp, but then again thats why you get the Leica adapter and Voigtlander 15mm for 😉
I think too many are looking high and low for reasons to hate the X-pro. I don’t see why not, its the EM-5’s competitor, albeit at different prices. From the RAW and JPG’s seen though, theres no replacement for sensor size. Fuji comes up trumps. Weather sealing on the EM-5 is a plus though. Good luck to both!