OMD, X-E1, "Wow images" and why engineers should not buy cameras . . .

HappyFish

Mu-43 Top Veteran
Joined
Sep 8, 2012
Messages
983
Real Name
Chad
Thanks all--OMD it is. When I think of my use (mainly vacations) if I went XE I really feel I would need to take a dSLR too, while with the OMD I am comfortable using it by itself. Not to mention that I just personally like the handling much better. As always, I try to put a lot of thought into my choice and then stay with it.

This decision, in contrast, is not as important as choosing my espresso machine . . . :wink:
a hobby kinda of mine or I should say I love espresso based drinks etc..

I have a Elektra A3
updated from a Pasquini livia 90 about 4 or so years ago
and had that about 8 or so years or more ? forgot now :)

want to update my mazzer to something now looking at some hand grinders :)
 

Jon F

Mu-43 Rookie
Joined
Mar 19, 2010
Messages
15
Well, a little espresso, only partially off topic . . .

My hobby too! Over the years, went from Krups steam to Gaggia to Riviera Lever to Livia 90 to my current setup, a La Spaziale Vivaldii II.

Good chance to try out my new camera. We have had grey days since it came, but on my test photos I have been really happy with colors and sharpness. Also still really like the handling!

Thanks all for the advice (and/or hand-holding).

Bokeh, Crema, it's all good to me!

PC230024-1-1.jpg


 

juangrande

Mu-43 Top Veteran
Joined
Dec 2, 2012
Messages
805
Location
COLORADO
OMD w/25PL vs. X-E1 w/kit. Is it a fair comp.

Right now I have both but am going to decide on one or the other. I've shot some comparisons but with different quality of lenses. One reason I am trying the E1 is because of the supposed quality kit lens. These 2 shots(jpeg) were taken at the same time, focal length(equivalent), ISO, f-stop and shutter speed. The OMD is much sharper and renders more accurate color but I don't have the 35mm 1.4 for the E1. OMD on the right. Is this a fair comparison?
 

Attachments

GaryAyala

Mu-43 Legend
Joined
Jan 2, 2011
Messages
6,564
Location
SoCal
Late to the thread, just remember that "wow" is all about the photographer not the camera. (The better the camera and lenses the easier and more consistently one can attain "Wow".) But I do appreciate Espresso.
 

juangrande

Mu-43 Top Veteran
Joined
Dec 2, 2012
Messages
805
Location
COLORADO
Fair comparison?

Here's another. This time Oly 45 1.8 vs E1 @ 55mm. Oly on the left. Pretty close in sharpness. I've had the OMD longer (3 days) but I've figured out the E1(1 day) already. I'm down to IBIS and slightly better color rendition vs. ease of use and quite good and affordable kit lens.
 

Attachments

nikki

Mu-43 Regular
Joined
Aug 2, 2010
Messages
59
Location
dublin ireland
I was also deciding between the two cameras today ( OMD + XE 1) and tried out both in the shop but they didnt seem all that different - I liked the feel of both cameras but as olympus is giving the 45mm lens free before the 31st december I decided to go for the OMD. Maybe if the XE 1 was a little further along in production and they have ironed out any problems that may arise !!
 

juangrande

Mu-43 Top Veteran
Joined
Dec 2, 2012
Messages
805
Location
COLORADO
I was also deciding between the two cameras today ( OMD + XE 1) and tried out both in the shop but they didnt seem all that different - I liked the feel of both cameras but as olympus is giving the 45mm lens free before the 31st december I decided to go for the OMD. Maybe if the XE 1 was a little further along in production and they have ironed out any problems that may arise !!
A 45mm for free! wow! How much for both in US$?
 

HappyFish

Mu-43 Top Veteran
Joined
Sep 8, 2012
Messages
983
Real Name
Chad
My hobby too! Over the years, went from Krups steam to Gaggia to Riviera Lever to Livia 90 to my current setup, a La Spaziale Vivaldii II.

Good chance to try out my new camera. We have had grey days since it came, but on my test photos I have been really happy with colors and sharpness. Also still really like the handling!

Thanks all for the advice (and/or hand-holding).

Bokeh, Crema, it's all good to me!

PC230024-1-1.jpg


PC230017-2.jpg

cool :)

and awesome looking pull :)



so you one HB forum then ?
I was looking hard at the machine you have also :)

to funny as I had a krups as my first some 25 years ago then got a $500 machine forgot what the name was now ;) yikes memory going
then got the pasquini then the elektra

my issue is I am from Maui originally so shipping to Maui used to be a expensive pain :) now I am on the mainland so its much easier

I am thinking of getting a Pharos hand grinder

I like to do a lot of camping and want to also be able to update my camp grinder and the pharos would do double duty :)

shot with my OMD and my OLY 75 1.8 lens :) my camp espresso setup


I love snow peak stuff also :) and am thinking of getting a couple small double wall titanium cups like I have in the pic for the home setup as well :)
 

Dalton

Mu-43 Veteran
Joined
Jan 24, 2010
Messages
329
Location
Portland, Oregon USA
Real Name
Dan Ferrall
Minor reference...

I am going to purchase one of these as an upgrade to my trusty EPL-1. But, for some reason, it's a harder decision that typical. Perhaps because they both have features I like. So, as a typical nerd, I hit a bunch of sites, spend time with Google, and basically get confused. In the past I have had everything from 4x6 to a pro 35 mm (not logical at all) then back to more practical options. My best trip photos ever were from my old Canon P&S--because, as you guessed it, it was the one I had with me.

So I scour the web for wow-images with both, which naturally leads me back to this site. No shortage of "wow" images with the OMD here. But the wow-image hunt can only go so far.

Anyway anyone have experience with these two nice options? Or trade one for the other?

My typical use would be travel photography. Landscape, architecture, memories . . . probably no sports and little if any wildlife. No large prints.
I am fairly sure you meant "4x5" as opposed to "4x6". 4x6 is a print format and 4" by 5" inches is a film media format size...as in Linhof-Technica, Calumet, etc...
Dan
 

Jon F

Mu-43 Rookie
Joined
Mar 19, 2010
Messages
15
I am fairly sure you meant "4x5" as opposed to "4x6". 4x6 is a print format and 4" by 5" inches is a film media format size...as in Linhof-Technica, Calumet, etc...
Dan
Good catch! In high school (a LONG time ago) I remember hanging out at a local camera shop with a darkroom. I borrowed a "press camera" and walked around town getting large negatives for contact printing. The camera was so heavy all the photos were tilted! B&W developing was really fun. Toning with chemicals instead of Photoshop. And, just for effect, applying developer with a brush to get a unique look.

To All:
Thanks all for the replies and also the samples shot with both cameras of interest--very useful. While I do realize the photographer is the source of classic images, I at least like to think I am starting with good tools. I am really liking my OMD. Heading to Hawaii for vacation in a couple weeks, so will have a lot of chance to use it.

[Coffee: Well, I know it's off topic . . . but also in a way kind of similar. (Plus the photos I posted were taken with the 12-35 2.8.) Lots of options on equipment, a few sites to check out, etc. Next upgrade here is a grinder. Hmm, cone or flat . . . ]
 

yekimrd

Mu-43 All-Pro
Joined
Jun 14, 2012
Messages
1,041
Location
Cincinnati, OH
Real Name
Mikey
With the current lens line up the Fuji only has a shallow DOF advantage with 1.5 lenses. The 35mm f1.4 has about a stop less DOF than the Summilux and the zoom has a stop at the wide end but is the same at the long end as the Panasonic 2.8 zoom. Every other lens in the fuji line up has the same or less DOF control than the equivalent m4/3 lens.

Gordon
Hmm.. You are correct with the MFT equivalents for the 25/1.4 and 12-35/2.8 but the FX counterparts for the 45/2.8 macro and 14/2.5 are provide at least 1 stop of advantage as well in providing shallower DoF (mostly attributable to the larger sensor)

In FF terms,

PL 25/1.4 is 50/2.8 while FX 35/1.4 is 53/2

P 12-35/2.8 is 24-70/5.6 while FX 18-55/2.8-4 is 27-83/4.2-6

PL 45/2.8 is 90/5.6 while FX 60/2.4 is 90/3.6 (almost 1 1/3 stop advantage)

P 14/2.5 is 28/5 while FX 18/2 is 27/3 (over 1 1/3 stop advantage)


mZD 40-150/4-5.6 is 80-300/8-11.2 while the upcoming 55-200/3.5-4.8 is 83-300/5.3-7.2 (almost 1 1/4 stop at the short end and 1 1/3 stop at the long end)
 

fin azvandi

Mu-43 All-Pro
Joined
Mar 12, 2011
Messages
1,172
Location
South Bend, IN
Flash was talking about comparing depth of focus - the crop factor of the sensor has no effect on the amount of light entering the lens aperture. That is to say, f/1.4 is really f/1.4 when you're talking about the amount of stops for calculating exposure - it's a physical ratio defined by the focal length and the size of the hole created by the aperture blades.
 

yekimrd

Mu-43 All-Pro
Joined
Jun 14, 2012
Messages
1,041
Location
Cincinnati, OH
Real Name
Mikey
Flash was talking about comparing depth of focus - the crop factor of the sensor has no effect on the amount of light entering the lens aperture. That is to say, f/1.4 is really f/1.4 when you're talking about the amount of stops for calculating exposure - it's a physical ratio defined by the focal length and the size of the hole created by the aperture blades.
He was talking about DoF which IS affected by the sensor size as opposed to light gathering ability (for calculating exposure) which as you say IS NOT. I have a limited understanding of the technical aspects so please feel free to set me straight if I'm wrong. Unless depth of FOCUS is not the same as depth of FIELD.

Edit: after re-reading my post, I realize I should not have used the word "brighter" which is not applicable. I will edit my original post.
 
Top