E-M10 with 12/2, 17/1.8 and 45/1.8 or the new LX100

[kstano83]

First I was asking for help here but now it is more "his or that". (sorry for another thread)

Briefly: A friend of mine would bring me any camera I'd want from states.

More details: I wanted to get me E-M10 with 12/2, 17/1.8 and 45/1.8 plus a used 4/3 camera body (maybe GX1) for my wife with an intention to share lenses on the same system. I was just about to ask the friend to get the Olympus kit for me but the new Panasonic LX100 came out. I'm like: wow I love the camera. I dont really care if it has touch screen or if it tilts etc. I'd take it as it is. The only thing bothering me as that electronic zoom control like on a P&S camera (yes, it's JUST that). It has been years since I used that zoom control. Maybe I'm too spoiled, but what if I want to zoom quickly and the "zoom speed" wont keep up? Or I will be like: Oh I need to zoom in...damn it's too much, zoom out. Then I'm like: are you dumb? you have feet. Then I'm thinking: At the wide end, at 12mm it is even faster than the 12/f2 from Olympus. I do too know I will loose more and more light as I zoom in compared to those prime lenses from Oly. But is it worth that price difference? I have read that the previous model of the LX100 had some kind of step zoom as an option where it would stop at 28, 35, 50mm etc. Maybe it'd help, but I still have doubts. If I went with the LX100, I'd have to get my wife something else as planned, maybe even a small P&S camera.

It'd be up to $2500 for Oly system and a spare 4/3 body vs $900 for the LX100 plus a small camera for my wife (which I haven't decided on yet). I'm still torn even with this HUGE price difference. Any thoughts? Please...

 

[Rudy]

What do you think is faster, zooming with the motorized zoom on the LX100 or swapping lenses?
If the zoom is really the only thing bothering you, then it's not a big deal.
It is annoying that Panasonic didn't go for manual zoom control, though.
Rudy

 

[b_rubenstein]

Think of the LX100 as a P&S camera with the image quality of a µ4/3 camera.

Actually, I question the speed in changing focal length with an electronic zoom compared to changing prime lenses; it takes more time to change lenses. This is particularly true of the typical OCD hobbyist that treats their gear like Faberge Eggs.

Does your wife really want an interchangeable lens camera and share lenses with you? Or are you just rationalizing 2 bodies and 4 lenses to play with?

I think your more concerned with picking out cool toys than figuring out what tools you need to create the images you want.

 

[jcm5]

If you're fine with being forever limited to that particular glass/range on the LX100, then the latter may be a cheaper, portable option. I've used the EM10 with the 12mm and 45mm, and both have been nothing but fantastic in all sorts of lighting conditions (and very portable as well); I don't know if the LX100 could handle the same load (that's not to say it can't, only that it hasn't been proven yet).

 

[Halaking]

Prime lenses give you mostly 1.8 and some 1.4, and you have telephoto option.
LX100 gives you little more than 12 MP because of multi aspect sensor, only part of the sensor is used.
We still don't how is the LX lens VS M4/3 primes.

Why not wait until the detail review?

 

[kevinparis]

if in doubt... decide what will make you feel most comfortable as a photographer.. at the end of the day its not about the camera. The LX100 looks a very fine camera.... but it wont, on its own, take 'better' pictures

K

 

[Livnius]

Keep in mind that there is an almost hidden bonus with the LX100....if you take advantage of the multi-aspect sensor (which you should if you buy it) and shoot something at 16:9 lets say, an urban landscape perhaps, you actually get a an overall width of frame and field of view roughly equivalent to 21mm, or in m43 speak that is 10.5mm .....how many m43 lenses, either zoom or prime, do you know of that give you a 21mm FOV at an aperture of f1.7 ? ...which then with a simple push of a button can become a 75mm f2.8 portait lens?

Food for thought

 

[kevinparis]

Keep in mind that there is an almost hidden bonus with the LX100....if you take advantage of the multi-aspect sensor (which you should if you buy it) and shoot something at 16:9 lets say, an urban landscape perhaps, you actually get a an overall width of frame and field of view roughly equivalent to 21mm, or in m43 speak that is 10.5mm .....how many m43 lenses, either zoom or prime, do you know of that give you a 21mm FOV at an aperture of f1.7 ? ...which then with a simple push of a button can become a 75mm f2.8 portait lens?

Food for thought

OK Joe... its late here in europeland and there whisky is on my lips... so maybe I just about get your maths... sadly though the advantages you pitch go against my experience... I want faster long... not faster ultra wide

My next camera purchase is a smaller than em-1.. the LX100 looks too big...leaning towards GM5, but will wait to hold in my hands

neither of them will make me a better photographer

K

 

[eljay]

If the LX100 lens performance holds up to the hype, then it would be tough to justify the kit you specify - that is just my view and I'm faaar from a photographer and just a hobbyist.

Regarding the zoom control, I agree with that concern. I hated it, so I sold my 14-42 PZ lens. I could never stop the zoom exactly where I wanted and it wasn't fast enough for me. My manually zooming 14-140 II is excellent in that area by comparison.

 

[pdk42]

It seems to me that an ILC will always be a different tool to a fixed lens compact. An ILC is about building a system that can adapt to a wide range of needs - fisheye, macro, long telephoto, T&S (maybe one day), UWA etc, and - crucially - a platform where you can invest in a library of lenses that will outlast several generations of new bodies/sensors. A fixed lens compact OTOH is about a one-stop-shop that will do a good job of the photographic middle-ground. I think there's room for both in a photographer's arsenal.

 

[Livnius]

OK Joe... its late here in europeland and there whisky is on my lips... so maybe I just about get your maths... sadly though the advantages you pitch go against my experience... I want faster long... not faster ultra wide

As do I, hence why not matter what I will be keeping the brilliant 75/1.8....but, having at my disposal a 10.5mm f1.7 lens that at a flick of a button turns into a 75mm f2.8 (and everything in between) is going to be incredibly handy and makes for a more versatile camera. I happen to really enjoy the particular look that is achieved by 'wide and fast' and this lens, despite being fixed and despite being a zoom has manged to push that particular envelope for m43 more than any single prime in the entire format....12mm f2 ...15mm f1.7 ...17mm f1.8 .....this lens is at the very least a 12mm f1.7 and given the right aspect ratio a 10.5mm f1.7 ...and guess what, you get free 4K video capability and an inbuilt EVF in a complementary 'digital back' that is attached to the lens.

My next camera purchase is a smaller than em-1.. the LX100 looks too big...leaning towards GM5, but will wait to hold in my hands

From all the comparisons I've seen it only marginally larger than the LX5/LX7 whilst being thicker. This fits in neatly with my own personal size limits that I've set, for when purchasing a 'compact all-rounder', we each apply our own constraints. One thing that my experience with the RX100 taught me was that there is a point when a camera becomes so small and cramped and lacking of controls that it becomes a bit sh!t to use....I suspect that I would feel the same way about the GM cameras. I think the LX100 could be a very engaging camera for the photographer.

neither of them will make me a better photographer

This is the absolute truth. No camera or lens has ever made me a better photographer..EVER....but, gear that ends up working with me rather than me having to fight it to achieve what I want, does help make the process more enjoyable, and I truly believe this is often reflected in the final image. The 'best' gear is rarely, if ever, better than the 'right' gear.

 

[b_rubenstein]

The LX100 is about the same height and width as the Olympus XZ-2 (P&S), 7mm thicker and 2 oz. heavier. It may not be pocketable, but the controls will work better with adult human hands.

 

[kstano83]

What do you think is faster, zooming with the motorized zoom on the LX100 or swapping lenses?
If the zoom is really the only thing bothering you, then it's not a big deal.
It is annoying that Panasonic didn't go for manual zoom control, though.
Rudy

Does your wife really want an interchangeable lens camera and share lenses with you? Or are you just rationalizing 2 bodies and 4 lenses to play with?

I think your more concerned with picking out cool toys than figuring out what tools you need to create the images you want.

Not really, I just want something that I will be happy with. Would I be happy with a motorized zoom? No, and the more I think of the LX100 the less I want it. The kit lens from the E-M10 and 45/1.8 would go to my wife to take pictures of our son and I'd use the 12 and 17 lenses.

if in doubt... decide what will make you feel most comfortable as a photographer.. at the end of the day its not about the camera. The LX100 looks a very fine camera.... but it wont, on its own, take 'better' pictures

K

That would be the E-M10 kit. I also think it is more convenient to learn what can be each prime lens used for (size and distance of an object) and take an advantage of it rather than zooming.

Maybe I got too carried away in my OP first and was trying to save money where it would not be beneficial to me. Also my friend will be visiting me soon and can bring me the Oly kit. The LX100 would not be available till then so he would have to send it to me which might rise the price in case customs open the package and charge me additional tax and vat.

One option I can think of is dumping the 12/f2 from oly together with another mu43 body for my wife and get E-M10 with 17/1.8, 45/1.8 and LX100 once it is available.

 

[fransglans]

i've tried to get used to zooms a couple of times but always failed. i just love to be stuck in one View. love walking out with just one lens mounted. so i would absolutely go for the em10kit... just my 2cents

 

[DHart]

Keep in mind that there is an almost hidden bonus with the LX100....if you take advantage of the multi-aspect sensor (which you should if you buy it) and shoot something at 16:9 lets say, an urban landscape perhaps, you actually get a an overall width of frame and field of view roughly equivalent to 21mm, or in m43 speak that is 10.5mm .....how many m43 lenses, either zoom or prime, do you know of that give you a 21mm FOV at an aperture of f1.7 ? ...which then with a simple push of a button can become a 75mm f2.8 portait lens?

Food for thought

Joe... thank you for that observation! I hadn't thought about the possibility of the LX100 giving an equivalent 21mm FOV with 16:9 aspect ratio and, in addition, with the f/1.7 aperture.

It so happens that among my most favorite modes of image making for landscape is with 16:9 aspect. A 21mm equivalent FOV is decently wide for what I like to do. Typically, I would stop down a couple or three f/stops in these situations to increase DOF and shoot at a lens' optimal aperture for best IQ.

Additionally, I can very much envision shooting at 21mm eqv. and wide open at 1.7, with the primary subject being very close up and to one side of the composition and a dramatic sweep to a distant and very OOF/visually interesting background on the other side of the frame. The LX100 would be just the camera to achieve this particularly dramatic kind of look, which I very much like!