What would you do in my case ...?

Discussion in 'Open Discussion' started by Wolf, Mar 28, 2012.

  1. Wolf

    Wolf Mu-43 Veteran

    Jan 14, 2012
    So here's my "situation"

    I currently got my EPL 2 and GF2 with the following lenses
    40-150 (for when i need a light travel zoom), the panasonic 14mm and the oly 14-42 kit lens
    The last two are actually for sale.

    I'm intrested in the following lenses in the future
    The panasonic 25mm 1.4, the oly 45mm, the panny 20 and the zuiko 17mm , the 100-300mm panasonic and the future oly macro lens

    The panny 100-300 and a macro lens I will most definatly get one day.

    However concerning the primes panasonic 25mm 1.4, the oly 45mm, the panny 20 and the zuiko 17mm, i've been thinking that getting a fuji X100 would be a better option.
    Why ? it doesn't cost that much anymore then the 25mm 1.4 and low light results will be a tad better due to the APS-C sensor (even with a great lens, GF2/epl2 images get grainy above 800 iso)
    The X100 can create a nice dof too if i'm correct and will thus be very suited for portraits too.

    And I don't think i have to mention it can replace the 17/20mm for street photography...

    How do you guys think about it ?
  2. troll

    troll Mu-43 Veteran

    Jan 25, 2012
    I think that you should think about what you actually need. :smile: You've got 3 lenses in your list that can be substituted by one unless you're really picky and serious. 17/2.8 is slow and expensive for what it is, 25/1.4 is probably the best one but the most expensive, and 20/1.7 lies right between them, it's one lens that can be used instead of both 17 and 25. The spread between 17, 20 and 25 is just too narrow to get all 3 lenses unless you've got a strong preference to some focal length(s) and just absolutely need it.

    A popular approach is to get one lens, like 20 or 25, and start working with it. Shoot everything with it exclusively for weeks or months and then you'll realize what you really need to buy next. For some it's short tele, for others it's a wide-angle... no one knows what it'll be for you, so I'd say get a normal lens and start shooting.

    The problem with x100 is that while it might be better at the moment, a couple years later you'll attach the same m43 primes to a new body and it'll beat x100. Imho it's too limiting to have a digital camera with not only a fixed lens, but a fixed prime lens.
    • Like Like x 2
  3. Ray Sachs

    Ray Sachs Super Moderator

    Apr 17, 2010
    Near Philadephila
    I have the X100 and love it - would never try to talk anyone out of it. The low light is not a tad better than the EPL2 - its quite a bit better. And the general IQ and Fuji colors are just wonderful. Its also a joy to shoot with, but there's definitely a learning curve - a lot of new X100 (and now X-Pro 1) owners have a LOT of questions and frustrations. Its kind of slow in operation and you really need to understand how the parallax works to fully take advantage of the OVF. That said, once you learn it, you'll love it. If you don't sell it first.


    You're asking it to the work of some wildly different lenses. It has the same focal length, effectively, as the 17mm - its just a lot nicer and faster. Its close enough to the 20, but the 25 is a notably different lens and the 45 is a TOTALLY different lens and different shooting experience. I love the X100, but not as a main / only camera. There are times I just don't want to shoot with a 35mm equivalent focal length. It can't touch the 45mm for portraits, for example. And its great for street photography if you like using an eye-level finder for street shooting, but if you don't (I rarely do), it doesn't really gain much on the 17 in that pursuit except in low light (where it gains a LOT).

    So think carefully before you get the X100 to replace all of the lenses you're thinking it will replace. It will replace one or two of them, but it doesn't do what the other ones do. That might be OK, or maybe not - only you can decide...

  4. Bhupinder2002

    Bhupinder2002 Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    I won't go into so muc details but here are some quick solutions to ur problems
    1) Fuji X100 will not make ur pics suddenly better and as others have pointed out its focal length and aperture is not for portraits .
    2) Sell one body - preferably GF2 and buy Olympus 45 mm 1.8 lens .Now shoot with Panny 14 mm 2.5 and Oly 45 mm 1.8 for the next couple of months and see.
    3) PL 25 mm 1.4 is quite expensive and it won't be good for portraits at all. I have both lenses and I can tell u olympus 45 mm is a phenomenonal lens and enough to keep u hooked to MFT. I don't see any need of two bodies but I do see the need of a better prime for u ..
    • Like Like x 1
  5. meyerweb

    meyerweb Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    Sep 5, 2011
    If you want better high ISO performance from m43 look at the G3 or GX1. Both are dramatically improved over the old 12mo cameras. Or wait a few weeks and see what the forthcoming GF5 offers
  6. shnitz

    shnitz Mu-43 Top Veteran

    Aug 25, 2011
    Austin, TX
    The X100 isn't a replacement for the Panasonic 25mm. If you are comparing pure output, then yes, the X100 will absolutely stomp any m4/3 camera, especially since our comparable lens is the Olympus 17mm. Plus, your proposed kit has a lot of overlap. The 20mm and 25mm are close enough that you don't necessarily need to spend money on both. The 17mm and 20mm are also fairly close lenses, when it comes down to it. Perhaps keep your 14mm, and then add the 25mm.

    Considering that the Fuji uses an APS sensor and a 23mm lens, it might create a nice DOF for portraits, but the distortion that you'd cause by using such an "incorrect" focal length for portaits makes the shallow DOF a moot point. Zoom your current 14-42mm lens to 17mm, and then get a female friend or family member. Try to take portraits of them with that focal length; you're going to make their nose all bulbous and make their face look messed up. Overall, it sounds like the Fuji isn't really the camera for you. As you'll notice by its price and its features, it is a niche product made to fill a very specific role. It is not meant to be used by the more inexperienced photographers, and it won't really reward you. If you don't know that you need the X100, then there is a 99% chance that you shouldn't own one.

    I agree with Ray though, that the Fuji, to someone that knows how to use it, has amazing sensor performance and a great lens. It's not going to become obsolete anytime in the next few years with regards to its image output or sensor performance.
  7. kinlau

    kinlau Mu-43 Top Veteran

    Feb 29, 2012
    The X100 is a lovely street and candid shooter, it's a fine package that would that would be a great second body.

    Like everything else, stuff will get old etc, but the resale value on a X100 won't drop thru the floor anytime soon unless you damage it. Just look at the resale on 6 year old 5D's or even older Panny L1's.

    Except for street portraits, I would not use the X100 for portraits, it's just too wide.
  8. LVL8hacker

    LVL8hacker Mu-43 Veteran

    Jan 4, 2012
    Pinehurst, North Carolina
    Real Name:
    Larry Anderson
    Get some legacy glass and do some real photography :) j/k
  9. ean10775

    ean10775 Mu-43 All-Pro

    Jan 31, 2011
    Cleveland, Ohio
    Real Name:
    Ignoring that Bhupinder is the resident Oly 45mm evangelist on these forums (no offense Bhupinder ;-) ), I generally agree with him on this - I would sell one of your bodies and pick up the Oly 45mm first to shoot with alongside your 14mm if its one of the lenses you're considering picking up anyway. You then then a relatively fast wide angle and a fast telephoto, which would be more versatile than picking up something comparably close in focal length on the wider end, unless you really know what focal length you prefer.

    That said, I sold my Oly 45mm because, while extremely sharp, I wasn't crazy about the FL for indoor shooting or how clinically sharp it was for portraits, which are what I most wanted it for. I also sold my Oly 17mm because despite how much I loved the FL and way it looked on my camera, I didn't see much difference between it and the kit lens on my E-PL1 since it was soft wide open in my opinion and needed to be stopped down.

    I went to a local shop and tested the X100 with the intent to buy it that day because I was sure it would be everything I wanted - a beautiful camera with an eye level finder, a fixed FL I knew I liked, a great lens and better IQ and low light performance than m43 systems, but I was left flat after trying it for a number of reasons, including all the commonly referenced quirks. As others have said, it really can't be a do it all camera, and for $1200 its expensive for what it is. However, I disagree with people who say it can't/shouldn't be used for portraits - the 35mm FL is perfectly suited for portraits as long as they are environmental or creative. What it may not be the best is for traditional head and shoulders type portraits or portraits where the subject fills the entire frame because of the distortion. Many of my favourite portraits I've seen posted on Flickr were shot with either the X100 or fast Leica or Canon 35mm lenses on full-frame bodies.