Olympus 17mm f/1.8 or used Fuji X100

Discussion in 'This or That? (MFT only)' started by ExCoderAtWork, Feb 4, 2014.

  1. ExCoderAtWork

    ExCoderAtWork Mu-43 Rookie

    Jan 20, 2014
    I currently have the Olympus OM-D E-M1. My main lens is the 12-40 f/2.8 ad I absolutely love it. The only drawback is the size at times. I have been considering getting the Olympus 17mm f/1.8 for a more compact form factor when I want/need it. I had the 17 for a while but returned it when I decided on the 12-40.

    I have also thought about getting the Fuji X100. Small form factor, good IQ and it has the focal length I am looking for. If I am patient I think I could get it for around $500-550. That is only a bit more expensive than the 17.

    Which direction should I go? Thoughts?
  2. pdk42

    pdk42 One of the "Eh?" team

    Jan 11, 2013
    Leamington Spa, UK
    I'd suggest the 17 if you had a Pen, but putting the 17 on the OM1 will still make it a big camera. If the 35mm equiv FL is what you're seeking, then the Fuji might be the better option. OTOH, a used E-PL5 plus the 17 will likely not be much different in price to the Fuji and you've got the flexibility of having two u43 bodies and can put the 17 on the OM1 when you need to.
  3. yakky

    yakky Mu-43 Top Veteran

    Jul 1, 2013
    If you aren't taking pictures of moving things the x100 is an amazing camera especially at the $500 price point. Look out for SAB, dusty lenses and wobbly flash hotshoes.

    I just picked one up and it is the most fun camera I own.
  4. dav1dz

    dav1dz Mu-43 Top Veteran

    Nov 6, 2012
    I find having two systems cumbersome. Especially how the two manufacturers process images so differently. YMMV.
  5. rbelyell

    rbelyell Mu-43 Veteran

    Sep 15, 2013
    Mountains of NY
    ive had an x100 since it came out. i love it. ive used it in the same bag with an epl5/45 for a 35/90mm combo. ive been using an rx1 for the past two months and while the IQ blows away anything ive used up til now, im still not selling my x100.

    the files are different than any other 35mm equivalent. theyre unique (theyre even unique for fuji as it is pre-xtrans) as is the entire experience using it. the bw is imo better than any other camera. the hybrid vf, the distance scale, the dials...you just cannot go wrong with this camera. you can always get a lens; you cant always get an 'experience'.
    • Like Like x 1
  6. demiro

    demiro Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Nov 7, 2010
    I agree completely. I recently had an X100 and 17/1.8 on my E-M5. I wanted to prefer the Fuji, but I shoot mostly people. The difference is real. Kept the 17/1.8; sold the X100 (sadly).

    I'll also echo the SAB concerns. Many sellers act like the issue is in the past. I spoke with a Fuji tech rep a while back and he said that the issue can occur at pretty much any point in the life of the camera. So it's not really valid to think that a camera has been good for 2 or 3 years so it will remain good.

    I liked having the fixed lens 35mm option in the bag with my m4/3s kit, but to each their own on that I suppose. Good point about processing. I shoot JPEGs mostly, so I was happy with Oly or Fuji. But it you have a raw workflow I can see it being a PITA to shoot both.
  7. demiro

    demiro Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Nov 7, 2010
    Stop that Tony -- you'll have me buying another X100!

    I was planning your set up (E-PL5 + 45/1.8 & X100). But I just couldn't move on from the 17/1.8.
    • Like Like x 1
  8. dhazeghi

    dhazeghi Mu-43 Hall of Famer Subscribing Member

    Aug 6, 2010
    San Jose, CA
    You can also get a refurbished 17/1.8 for $400.

    There is a huge ergonomic difference between the X100 and the E-M1. The X100 is very much a traditional rangefinder camera in its controls - aperture ring on the lens, shutter speed dial, exposure compensation dial and so forth. It looks and feels classic. It's also a much more deliberate camera - AF while improved is nowhere near as fast as on your E-M1 (I'm talking about S-AF, C-AF hardly exists on it). In terms of image quality, the E-M1 has the edge - X100 is one of the best 12MP cameras made, but it's still a 2007 Sony design under the hood. The Fuji lens is definitely nicer though.
  9. Steven

    Steven Mu-43 All-Pro

    May 25, 2012
    I thought the price difference was greater . Oh well .. for me the biggest thing to get used to when switching is different depth of field. You have to remember to dial in smaller aperture for the larger sensor in X100 especially for close ups. It has brilliant auto white balance . Came in handy in dim restaurants with bad lighting . Unfortunately I would often leave it on auto so now I have a bunch of blurry but correctly colored photos haha.
    On the upside for Fuji , its quiet shutter is almost like Ibis :)(no shutter shock). Got some clear photos at shutter speeds as low as 1/4.
  10. I don't know if I'd describe differences in file output and processing requirements as a PITA, but more like a big part of the reason for having cameras from two different brands in the first place.
  11. That was (still is) a great sensor though, variations of which also appeared in the Ricoh GXR A12 modules and the Leica X1 if I'm not mistaken.
    • Like Like x 1
  12. nickthetasmaniac

    nickthetasmaniac Mu-43 All-Pro

    Jan 11, 2011
    Couple of thoughts...

    First, as mentioned, the EM1 is a fairly large body, so even with a little lens like the 17/f1.8, it's still not going to be a particularly compact kit. That said, I've been using the 17mm on an EM5 for a few months now and I've really enjoyed it. So much so that on a recent 2 week trip to Malaysia it was pretty much all I used... It's a wonderful lens and in my opinion has a bit more 'character' that some of the better reviewed, but perhaps more clinical Zuikos like the 45mm and 75mm.

    Second, depending on your needs, the X100 isn't particularly compact either - it's small, but it's definitely not practically 'pocketable'.

    An alternative I'd suggest would be the Ricoh GR. Excellent sensor and lens, outstanding user interface with about 20 years of thoughtful evolution behind it, and genuinely pocketable (ie. it fits in my jeans...). Plus if you shoot jpeg it has a 35mm and 43mm crop option - the 35mm being only 2mp under the X100's native resolution.

    My thoughts are that if your main camera is largeish, your second camera should be something that you can take everywhere, hence recommending the GR.

    The X100 is definitely a love/hate thing. I also owned one for a while and just couldn't get used to it. The files were lovely, and it looked sexy as can be, but in the end it felt clumsy to use (mostly because of what felt like a poor integration of modern and traditional design elements) and eventually it just felt like it was slowing me down - not in a 'slow down and focus on the moment' kind of way, but more a 'the tool is getting in the way'...

    From what I've heard the X100s addresses many of these concerns but then that appears to be out of your budget.
    • Like Like x 1
  13. kevinparis

    kevinparis Cantankerous Scotsman Subscribing Member

    Feb 12, 2010
    Gent, Belgium
  14. tomO2013

    tomO2013 Mu-43 Top Veteran Subscribing Member

    Oct 28, 2013
    I think the X100 has a different 'look' to an OM-D. If you already have a m43 system, sometimes it is nice to have a different, second camera system just so that you have something else in the stable that can produce a different 'look' for the times that you want it to.
    The X100 is still to this day possibly my favorite Fuji camera - I just love the black and white conversions that you can get from it.
    Another option - hold out and pick up the Panasonic Leica 15. it looks relatively compact, but is likely to have great image quality based on the existing Panasonic-Leica partnership range (macro, 25mm summilux, 42.5mm nocticron) etc...
  15. ExCoderAtWork

    ExCoderAtWork Mu-43 Rookie

    Jan 20, 2014
    I appreciate all of the suggestions. I have to admit, there is part of me that would just like to have a rangefinder type camera to augment my SLR like E-M1. One thing that does concern me is the auto-focus of the X100. I mostly shoot people (my kids) and not having a responsive camera would be quite frustrating. I don't mind the size of the Oly / 17mm combination that much. I came from a Nikon D7000 to the Oly, so it already seems pretty small to me.
  16. mrjr

    mrjr Mu-43 Top Veteran

    Sep 25, 2012
    I had to work out my own conclusion to this same decision just a couple months ago. I was considering the Canon EOS M and the Olympus 17mm. Fuji X100 absolutely would have been a consideration, too, but it was too pricey for me (Although it is a good deal these days. I'd totally love to own one.).

    I mostly shoot family shots, too, and 16 month old toddlers are energetic! I went for the Olympus 17mm, and I'm glad I did. Pretty sure it was the right choice.
  17. alex66

    alex66 Mu-43 Top Veteran

    Jul 23, 2010
    I would second a Ricoh GR as the IQ is good the user interface is on all the Gxx Ricoh's superb its the gold standard for compacts. Alas the Ricoh is a 28mm equivalent so if you are after 35mm equiv then the Fuji is a good choice but the AF is not as good as the Ricoh or the Olympus. I have noticed that some of the Ricoh GXR options are way down in price as another option. I would go into a shop or find someone who will let you have a hands on with them, you may find that you hate the feel of the Fuji or the OLy 35mm.
  18. mattia

    mattia Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    May 3, 2012
    The Netherlands
    You can crop in camera on the GR and get 14MP images at 35mm equivalent, right?
  19. krugorg

    krugorg Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Jul 18, 2011
    Minnesota USA
    I think it is more like 10 megapixels in 35mm crop mode, but +1 on recommending the GR. I like my X100 and it is great for certain subjects, but the GR has fantastic output and it is much smaller than the X100. I find it is nice to have a compact carry option that doesn't sacrifice on quality.
  20. mcumeda

    mcumeda Mu-43 Regular

    Sep 25, 2011
    I had an x100. I really liked it, but the autofocus is slow. If you are shooting moving kids it can be a problem. Also, the 17mm will be a better "investment.". New bodies will come out, and you can use the lens for a long time on those new bodies. The 17mm isn't very big and even though the em1 is larger than most m4/3, the 17mm still protrudes past the grip so it isn't like the em1 is making the combo that much bigger.
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.