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

[flash]

............. using the Fuji's more shallow DoF advantage.......

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.

Weirdly the smaller m4/3 system (sensor) allows shallower DOF control than any other interchangeable mirrorless system, even with AF lenses.

Gordon

 

[jloden]

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.

Weirdly the smaller m4/3 system (sensor) allows shallower DOF control than any other interchangeable mirrorless system, even with AF lenses.

Just to be clear, I was referring specifically to the upcoming Fujinon 56mm f/1.4 lens with that statement, not an overall comparison between the two systems. That's mostly pointless to compare IMO unless shallow DoF is your only criteria.

The upcoming Panasonic 43mm f/1.2 would be very close for DoF at the same approximate focal length as the Fuji lens... but it wouldn't be on the X-E1 I want to use it on, that's all :smile:

 

[Chrisnmn]

hey guys, Chris Sorensen a travel photographer recently bought himself an XE-1 and hes is now wondering of selling his OMD kit as he believes that the XE1 matches the 5DMKII image quality

and heres his first set with the XE-1

chris sorensen - portrait & travel photographer - india

as for the comments heres the exact quote from Chris on dpreview:

I'd say the X-E1 with 18-55 gives me a little better than the OM-D with the 12-35. Not bad considering the lens is about half as much. And I love the OM-D, and the lens options. The 12-35, 25,45 and 75 are great, as is the camera. But I prefer the handling and ergonomics, and the image quality of the Fuji. Even when not using the Fuji JPGs and processing RAW, the files seem to be more filmlike than the OM-D files. Plus the lens OIS is close to the Oly IBIS, so that helps make up for one element of switching.


I would have no problem going all mirror less. I rarely use my 5DmkII anymore (though sometimes you need the big cam to impress certain clients.) I used it once recently on a commercial shoot and once on an editorial. But I also just used my OM-D for two editorials for big publications, both times when the IBIS made it the right tool to get slow shutter speed effects where I couldn't use a tripod.

With just the OM-D, sometimes it was tough to get shallow depth of field like you can with full frame. The Fuji makes that a little easier. And the good lenses on both systems are as good as Canon's. And the image quality of the Fuji matches the 5DmkII in a much smaller package. And arguably the OM-D is very close in IQ. And the OM-D beats my 5D Classic which people used to do a lot of great work.

So if you can live without microscopic DOF, I say why not try it.

 

[jloden]

hey guys, Chris Sorensen a travel photographer recently bought himself an XE-1 and hes is now wondering of selling his OMD kit as he believes that the XE1 matches the 5DMKII image quality

and heres his first set with the XE-1

chris sorensen - portrait & travel photographer - india

Those are stunning! But, Chris's work with the OM-D is amazing too... pretty sure you could send him out with my Canon S95 and still be blown away by the results

 

[Chrisnmn]

Those are stunning! But, Chris's work with the OM-D is amazing too... pretty sure you could send him out with my Canon S95 and still be blown away by the results

I was going to say, You can send him with an iPhone and would come back with a National Geographic cover. so yes.

but still. is nice reading his comments though about the systems. He actually go shoot with them, not just charting, and pixel peep every flower to see where each system falls.

 

[jloden]

but still. is nice reading his comments though about the systems. He actually go shoot with them, not just charting, and pixel peep every flower to see where each system falls.

Agreed, and I love his work.

I dug up the thread to read the rest of it and found this other quote from Chris as well:

As far as sharpness, I would say they're about the same. The OM-D w/ the 12-35 is a killer combo and the IQ difference between it and the Fuji is not so much sharpness as it is colors, highlight rolloff, less digital feel, DOF, etc.

 

[Jon F]

Thanks--talk about a tough one!

Not sure why this decision is to tough. Perhaps because I REALLY REALLY prefer the handling and design of the OMD but then I see all these wow images from the X-E1. Classic right-brain left-brain dilemma. And no, I can't buy both! Plus, I would not know which one to carry at any given time anyway.

By the way, in the vein of "best camera is the one you have with you" . . .
a couple photos from an unexpected excursion during a business trip . . .
Taken with my ancient Canon S400 elph . . . The best I had with me . . . Not museum calibre, but great memories . . .

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

 

[jloden]

Not sure why this decision is to tough. Perhaps because I REALLY REALLY prefer the handling and design of the OMD but then I see all these wow images from the X-E1. Classic right-brain left-brain dilemma.

If it helps any, check out Chris Sorenson's Sri Lanka pics with the OM-D and 12-35mm - says to me you can get those wow images with either setup, so if you prefer the design and handling of the OM-D I wouldn't have any concerns about going that route.

 

[Jon F]

If it helps any, check out Chris Sorenson's Sri Lanka pics with the OM-D and 12-35mm - says to me you can get those wow images with either setup, so if you prefer the design and handling of the OM-D I wouldn't have any concerns about going that route.

Thanks, VERY interesting. I have both on different tabs in Safari, and, when I go back and compare, they are closer than I might have imagined. Both series are quite amazing.

 

[Ulfric M Douglas]

Thanks, VERY interesting. I have both on different tabs in Safari, and, when I go back and compare, they are closer than I might have imagined. Both series are quite amazing.

He seems to be processing both sets with the same style. This style is not really from the cameras themselves, although the original pictures are : we do not see the originals.
If the camera & lens is competent you can make them end up like these pictures, therefore each of your choices would be equally valid : except for the important 'feel' or enjoyment of the action of using each camera. Now that's likely to be more different than the pictures you make.

 

[Chrisnmn]

Thanks, VERY interesting. I have both on different tabs in Safari, and, when I go back and compare, they are closer than I might have imagined. Both series are quite amazing.

thats because, both system are quite impressive when delivering images. the problem is, whatever you handle to that guy is going to comeback with impressive shots. so once again...It is not about the gear!!

what ive figured out of both systems is

XE1 has better image resolution (bigger sensor) ergo tad better image quality.
OMD stunning AF speed, almost the same image quality, weather sealed body, IBIS, better EVF and bit smaller than the XE1.

Both, have one thing that non other DSLR system has for me (including Canikon) and that is that both render quite a "film" like images, in terms of color, highlights, shadows, etc. i dont know what it is, but sometimes Olympus and Fuji's images have that "flavor" which is not that digital that i love.

 

[jloden]

He seems to be processing both sets with the same style. This style is not really from the cameras themselves, although the original pictures are : we do not see the originals.
If the camera & lens is competent you can make them end up like these pictures, therefore each of your choices would be equally valid : except for the important 'feel' or enjoyment of the action of using each camera. Now that's likely to be more different than the pictures you make.

thats because, both system are quite impressive when delivering images. the problem is, whatever you handle to that guy is going to comeback with impressive shots. so once again...It is not about the gear!!

Yeah, Chris has stated elsewhere he uses a fairly heavily modified VSCO LightRoom preset for processing his images, which is why all have that particular "look". I agree it says two things:

1) You can get that look with either camera, and either is a valid choice for IQ

2) Chris is really, really good... and it's not the gear

 

[Chrisnmn]

Yeah, Chris has stated elsewhere he uses a fairly heavily modified VSCO LightRoom preset for processing his images, which is why all have that particular "look". I agree it says two things:

1) You can get that look with either camera, and either is a valid choice for IQ

2) Chris is really, really good... and it's not the gear

agreed. I personally use a modified version of two VSCO film presets as well in all my files. And like you said, you can achieve that "look" with any system. Im just impressed with what the OMD and the XE1 are doing to photography. and for the third time, now more than ever, is up to us, not to our cameras to deliver.

 

[Luckypenguin]

I should add that it's hard to go to India and NOT come back with "wow" images, regardless of the camera. If I was looking for sample images to help advertise a new camera, I'd just grab a few photographers and send them there for a few weeks.

 

[Bhupinder2002]

I should add that it's hard to go to India and NOT come back with "wow" images, regardless of the camera. If I was looking for sample images to help advertise a new camera, I'd just grab a few photographers and send them there for a few weeks.

And I can guide them thro India ahahhahha .
Cheers
Bhupinder

 

[Luckypenguin]

Having said that, those X-E1 shots from the link provided were particularly great. There's a wonderul softness to them, although Northern India can get a haze in the air which softens the light and would influence the look of the images. The E-M5 images from Sri Lanka appear to have been shot in harsher and more difficult lighting conditions. I know which set I prefer but I'd be wary of making a judgement between the two cameras based on the two sets of images, having been shot in two different locations and environments.

 

[WasOM3user]

Given both cameras are more than capable of producing stunning shots then perhaps the handling becomes much more key. The happier you are with the handling the more likely you are to get that "special" shot especially on trips where things can happen unexpectedly!!

 

[LeoS]

One thing really annoys me about XE-1 now that I've used it for a bit.

It's great in high ISO but can't focus for **** in low light.

The x-trans sensor and great lenses are killer mirrorless combo for low light situation, yet the AF is this gigantic achilles heel crippling its low light performance.

 

[Jon F]

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 . . .

 

[jloden]

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 . . .

I hear you on the espresso machine - some decisions are just of greater import!

I think you'll be really happy with the OM-D... it's a very capable camera and the one you like using the most is always the best camera in my opinion. You'll shoot more, and more often, and you'll appreciate the results and the process in a way that you won't if the camera gets in your way.