1. Reminder: Please user our affiliate links to get to your favorite stores for holiday shopping!

From Fuji X to the Pen-F

Discussion in 'Olympus Cameras' started by stockografie, Jul 26, 2016.

Tags:
  1. stockografie

    stockografie New to Mu-43

    9
    Jun 3, 2012
    Germany
    Hi girls and guys,

    Thought you might be interested in my switch from Fuji X to the Pen-F

    From Fuji X to the Olympus Pen-F

    If it is not appropriateto post this please let me know.

    Have a great day
    Stockografie
     
    • Like Like x 5
    • Informative Informative x 2
  2. wjiang

    wjiang Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Hmm isn't Fuji also making small primes now?
     
  3. Turbofrog

    Turbofrog Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Mar 21, 2014
    The 27/2.8 pancake is okay, and there's the new 35/f2 WR which is probably the most appealing lens in Fuji's line-up. They've said they'll make 23/f2 and 50/f2 lenses in their roadmap, but if you don't like those FLs you're stuck with lenses that are noticeably bigger than M4/3. Obviously those Fuji lenses are faster, but it depends on your needs and priorities.

    Compact Camera Meter
     
    • Like Like x 1
  4. RickBowden

    RickBowden Mu-43 Rookie

    12
    Mar 2, 2016
    Richard Bowden
    I too switched from Fuji to Olympus. I loved the Fuji cameras but I shoot mainly landscapes and hated the workflow with the Fuji RAW files (i.e. going backwards and forwards between convertors trying to get a level of sharpness and detail I'd wanted). I compared the EM5 mk II against the X-T1 and despite the smaller sensor, files had more detail. Possibly due to Fuji allegedly de-noising their RAW files (if that's true). Yes the Olympus has slightly more noise but that adds to a sense of fine detail in the distance.
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
  5. drd1135

    drd1135 Zen Snapshooter

    Mar 17, 2011
    Southwest Virginia
    Steve
    This is fine. Members give links to their own review all the time.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  6. gryphon1911

    gryphon1911 Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Mar 13, 2014
    Central Ohio, USA
    Andrew
    I tried Fuji for a long time. Loved the feel of the bodies an the controls, loved the IQ...HATED the responsiveness of the shutter/general system. AF speed was annoying me as well. Fuji has made strides in this regard, and I look forward to experiencing what the XT2 has to offer, but I find that the m43 system is one of the best S-AF systems out there in regards to speed and accuracy of any camera system I've ever used.

    I have no regrets in leaving the Fuji X system and love what I can do with the Olympus system.

    If I need 135 size imaging sensor, I have a Nikon Df, which is very small in comparison to other DSLRs with same sensor size. Fuji just never fully gelled with me, but I do see why some love it and use it.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  7. absolutic

    absolutic Mu-43 Veteran

    416
    Jan 21, 2011
    I shot over 40,000 with Fujis but ultimately got rid of the system due to AF system. It was just not there, especially in low light. m43 is just better in AF, especially my GX7 with its instant AF in any light and instant face recognition. Face recognition has been a fail for Fuji system (eye focus errors, inability to use AEL lock and phase detect AF with face recognition). However, Fuji appears to have fix many of the problems with its upcoming XT2 (remains to be see though). I do wish m43 system went to 24MP sensor soon.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  8. pdk42

    pdk42 One of the "Eh?" team

    Jan 11, 2013
    Leamington Spa, UK
    I'm playing with an X-E1 and a 35/1.4 at the moment in order to assess the Fuji system - at least in a limited way The camera is dated compared to current Fuji models so I can't and won't comment on AF and responsiveness. However, it's a good way to assess most other aspects.

    This is my conclusion:

    - Fuji IQ (16Mp sensor) at low ISO is marginally better than the 16Mp u43 sensor for all except landscapes. I agree with Rick Bowman's view that landscapes are not the Fuji's strong point and u43 is as good or better (although the new 24Mp sensor seems to have fixed that). At higher ISO the Fuji lead increases. This is the one thing that might tempt me to the system.

    - Fuji handling is a Marmite thing. Despite being bought up on a Pentax SPII SLR, I much prefer the dual dial system on the E-M1 to the Fuji's old school system. I can rapidly adjust anything that matters on the Olympus without taking the camera from my eye. The same cannot be said of the Fuji. The exp comp knob in particular is too hard to move with just the thumb.

    - The u43 f1.8 (ish) primes are really small and offer a superb compromise of size, cost and performance. For me, if these didn't exist then I doubt I'd have moved to the system in the first place. The newer u43 Pro zooms are approaching the size of other systems (incl Fuji) and don't appeal to me at all (YMMV).

    - Olympus cameras offer a lot of things that I'd miss if I went Fuji - IBIS and LiveComp/time being the two biggies for my needs.

    - The size of the Fuji zooms and the fast primes are the wrong size of compact for my liking. Compared to the 1.8 u43 primes they're just too big.

    Net, net - the Fuji system is nice but not yet enough to tempt me away from u43. However, the lower noise of the Fuji system does call me from time to time (usually when I'm pushing the shadows on a higher ISO file) and early results I've seen of the new 24Mp sensor seem to show that it's now a stop or more improved again. The E-M1ii has big shoes to fill! I can see me thinning down my u43 system in preference to an XT2 and a few primes if it fails to deliver.
     
    • Informative Informative x 1
  9. Turbofrog

    Turbofrog Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Mar 21, 2014
    I don't think that's totally fair. Fuji's high-end zooms are downright huge. The Olympus 40-150/2.8 is kind of an oddball that either appeals or it doesn't. It has a 50% longer zoom range than the lenses it competes against, so the increased size is commensurate. The 35-100/2.8 is the compact short-tele zoom for M4/3 users.

    Compact Camera Meter

    Camerasize doesn't have the Fuji 50-140/2.8, but the 100-400 is not dramatically bigger (3.3" x 7" vs. 3.7" x 8.3") for context.
     
  10. tkbslc

    tkbslc Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Agree!

    40-150mm on m4/3 is 80-300mm equivalent. 50-140 on Fuji is 75-210 equivalent. Not the same at all. We get 70-200mm equivalent f2.8 with our 35-100mm X, which is slightly smaller than Fuji's low end f6.7 telephoto: Compact Camera Meter
     
  11. pdk42

    pdk42 One of the "Eh?" team

    Jan 11, 2013
    Leamington Spa, UK
    I think you're both missing my point and the camerasize link proves it! Both of those zooms (Pana 35-100 and Fuji's 50-230) are huge and neither really appeals to me (but disclosure :hmmm:- I have the 35-100 and I tolerate it for its range!! It's the limit though - I'd never even consider the 40-150/2.8). If I was happy with gear that size, I'd not be much worse off with a Canon APSC setup. If big Tele lenses are important to you, then I can see it would be a different story, but FOR ME, the small primes are where I want to be.
     
    Last edited: Jul 26, 2016
    • Agree Agree x 1
  12. tkbslc

    tkbslc Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    35-100 is huge? It's like the size of a coke can.
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
  13. stockografie

    stockografie New to Mu-43

    9
    Jun 3, 2012
    Germany
    There are some really good comments and replies. Thanks to all. I´ll take some time this evening when I am back from work to answer a little more detailed. In Germany it´s ten to eight in the morning, so I´ve got a days work ahead of me.
    Cheers
     
  14. pdk42

    pdk42 One of the "Eh?" team

    Jan 11, 2013
    Leamington Spa, UK
    Well, maybe "huge" is a bit excessive! I guess I just want small cute kit.
     
  15. tkbslc

    tkbslc Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    I do too, but I carry a 42.5 (or 25) and 75mm instead. Stack those in the bag and you are bigger than a 35-100.

    But the point was that if you want a f2.8 telephoto, you can get one in m4/3 for the size of a cheap-o slow telephoto for another system. What other system you going to get a coke-can sized weather-sealed f2.8 telephoto? If you were on an SLR it would be more like the size of a 2-liter bottle! :) (Granted with some differences in Dof and low light ability due to sensor size, but still....)

    Here's Samsung's: Compact Camera Meter
    Here's a Canon: Compact Camera Meter
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  16. tkbslc

    tkbslc Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Very good sample shots and I enjoyed reading your thoughts.

    If you want any other primes, the 25mm f1.8, 45mm f1.8 and Sigma 60mm f2.8 are all wonderful matches for your camera (as well as several Panasonic options). If you want a telephoto zoom, the Panasonic 35-100 f4-5.6 is barely bigger than your 12mm. It's quite remarkable. And the Panasonic 12-32mm is smaller than the 17mm you have and is a nice, sharp mini standard zoom. m4/3 has lots of outstanding options that are under 200g and 50cm

    Size comparison showing Pen-F with lenses I mentioned above: Compact Camera Meter
     
    • Like Like x 1
  17. gryphon1911

    gryphon1911 Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Mar 13, 2014
    Central Ohio, USA
    Andrew
    And just to prove your point, I posted this blog a little bit over a year ago. The very fisrt image has the 40-150/2.8 in the middle, flanked by the Tamron 70-300/4-5.6 on the left and the Nikon 80-200/2.8 on the right.

    While I do not carry the Oly 40-150/2.8 around as everyday kit, it definitely is not "huge" from a certain point of view - that being a DSLR APS-C or 135 equivalent field of view. Compared to other m43 lenses - it can be considered quite large....but that is all relative to the user and their needs desires.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  18. drd1135

    drd1135 Zen Snapshooter

    Mar 17, 2011
    Southwest Virginia
    Steve
    35-100 4-5.6? Slow but sharp and very cute. :inlove: I mean, current technology kicks in at some point and there's only so small you can make a 2.8 zoom.

    I had an X100s a few years ago. I loved the handling but the look of the images left me lukewarm. I suspect the choices made in making mu43 lenses correspond better to what I like.
     
  19. GBarrington

    GBarrington Mu-43 Veteran

    On some m43s bodies, yes. It isn't always a size and weight issue it can also be a handling issue as well.
     
  20. magicaxeman

    magicaxeman Mu-43 Regular

    76
    Feb 27, 2016
    Essex UK
    Ian
    You would and by a fair margin, given the weight of a 70-200mm F2.8 @ approx 1.4 kg + a prosumer body @ around 800 + grams Vs a sub 500 gram Olympus body + 40-150 Pro with a max weight of 880 grams.

    So thats 2.2kg + for the Canon rig Vs 1.2 - 1.3 kg for the Oly rig, in fact the whole Oly rig weighs less than the Canon lens alone.

    Being a long term Fuji X user I agree in part with the findings but would add that the iQ from the Fuji sensor does out perform even the new 20mp Oly, especially when it comes to noise handling, this is where the Fuji's could be far ahead if they solved the plastic skin issue thats prevalent with the mk2 & mk3 sensors, the mk1 sensor on the X-pro1 seems to suffer less from this problem.

    Oly focus is miles ahead, even the contrast only sensors, they lock focus instantly and very accurately.

    I would say the main feature I miss is the shutter speed dial and the aperture rings on the lenses, I love shooting the old way.

    But to be honest the main reason's I didn't bother upgrading the Fuji system where:

    Weight - the weight of lenses was getting heavier as was the weight of the X-Pro2, with a 45gr weight increase over the X-Pro1

    Sensor performance - I never liked the XT-1's sensor (mk2) and didn't like the performance of the mk 3 sensor in the X-Pro2/XT-2 either

    Lens range - No fast long telephoto's and the only long telephoto is a beast of a lens, especially when compared to the 40-150 Pro and even the 300mm F4 Oly lenses, I mean a lens that weighs as little as the 300mm F4 that with the 1.4 tc can give you an efv of over 800mm @ f5.6 Vs the Fuji which can at best give you (with the 2.0 tc) the same 800mm @ F11? its a no brainer really.

    Yes I miss the larger sensor which makes cropping shots easier, I miss the control set of the X-Pro1 and I miss the better high ISO/noise performance and like many would love to have a FF system to cover portraits etc but I can't handle the extra weight penalty so for me its Olympus, it works for me and I can manage the weight.