Olympus E-M5 versus Fuji X PRO 1
Of course this is a pretty unfair comparison. We are comparing apple with oranges. Both cameras are different priced, have different specs, and different strengths. The Olympus E-M5 is cheaper, has a faster AF, weather sealed body. The X PRO 1 has a super image quality and a very innovative hybrid viewfinder. But ultimately isn’t it interesting to see how great the image quality difference is? 
Our reader Gabrielle Motola sent me the link (Click here) to a short test made with both cameras. Gabrielle explicitly says that is not a regular and scientific test. Her impression is that “this test clearly showed me is that both cameras are capable of providing an outstanding image. The choice of purchase comes down to preference and operational flow.”
Here are the images:
E-M5: Full Size and 100% crop.
X PRO 1: Full Size and 100% crop.
X PRO 1 lens test:
A great lens test has been published by Valentin Sama. read more at MirrorlessRumors.com
Price difference:
The E-M5 costs $700 or 500 Euro less than the X PRO 1:
E-M5 at Amazon, Adorama, BHphoto, J&R, Jessops, Amazon UK, Amazon Deutschland and Amazon Japan.
Fuji X PRO 1 at Amazon, Adorama, Bhphoto, Epxansys US, Expansys Canada, Jessops UK, Expansys UK, Amazon Japan and eBay Japan.
kesztió
2 years ago |While E-M5 is a (semi)professional, ergonomical, weather-sealed, tilting LCD “workhorse” camera with a handful of high quality lenses (both from panasonic and Olympus),
The X Pro 1 is merely a highly overpriced fashion gadget, despite of its outstanding image quality.
stepper
2 years ago |The X-Pro1 body does seem a bit pricey. But its lenses look to be a bargain at $600 a piece. Especially since initial reviews are hinting at legacy potential.
stepper
2 years ago |also, the Oly is about as fashion driven as the Fuji (if not more so)
MJr
2 years ago |Indeed. (more i’d say)
Just a stupid troll comment from k.
ProShooter
2 years ago |Not at all, the fuji is way more looks than function…and not all that much looks to begin with…
MJr
2 years ago |I don’t know what you think a camera is for, but if any camera is function before fashion it is the fuji.
jeriko
2 years ago |Personally I think the Olympus is one of the ugliest cameras out there. I’m a big fan of the E-PX series but I think Olympus went overboard with the retro-wannabe styling on the E-M5. The thing that kills me with the E-M5 is that big’ol, fake pentaprism. Sure Olympus will argue that it’s the optimum location for their stabilization gizmos but that doesn’t change the fact that it’s a giant, honking, fake pentaprism.
Anonymous
3 weeks ago |Why are you whining about the “pentaprism?. It is there to provide the outstanding image stabilization of the E-M5′s IBIS system…a system that NO other camera can compete with. WHO CARES what any camera looks like…all I care about is how good the pictures are. I suggest that you may be a non-pro poser who puts Ferrari decals on his Yugo.
El Duderino
2 years ago |Yeah, and Fuji still can’t make a camera that focus with any reliability. Shame as the image quality when it finally does focus is very nice. It’s certainly not worth the extra $700 to me.
mpgxsvcd
2 years ago |I never understood why everyone thinks the Fuji cameras have much better image quality. They look good but no better than any other APS-C. And there really isn’t that big a difference between APS-C and the “BEST” M4/3s cameras.
JimD
2 years ago |Yes, you’re right, the aps-c is catching up.
Robert
2 years ago |Bullshit!
aeon
2 years ago |Yeah, except for the fact that the x-pro1 has an amazing signal-to-noise ratio and overall superb low-light performance, and is in a body smaller and lighter than DSLR’s with APS-C sensors. If you only ever look at small crops of your photos, yeah, sure, there isn’t much difference between MFT and APS-C. The X-PRO1 doesn’t compete with MFT, though, it’s competing with FF sensors, and is doing pretty darn good, all things considered. Check this: http://www.techradar.com/news/photography-video-capture/cameras/hands-on-fuji-x-pro1-review-1051503
Eltati
2 years ago |I think this is a joke. Olympus is a company that tries to survive in a very critical economic condition and will very likely even wear another name soon. The OM-D looks like a DSLR, but it isn’t at all and I’m not fully understanding the concept to weatherize this type of (clearly non-professional) camera either. This type of camera is for me the perfect gadget: like a sportscar – mind the small sensor – with a motor-cycle alike engine. Fujifilm is a highly professional brand, making upper-quality film, also still middle-format camera’s, expensive glass for the best video-camera’s, etc. The X-Pro1 is a no-nonsense product, not so much an ancestor of the Leica, but rather of the Contax G2, intended for photography purists. Overpriced? For me a 5D MkIII or D800 are seriously overpriced – with an increase of more than 50% in their price, they’ve gone out of range now for most pro-sumers and even professional photographers that need to watch their budgets a bit carefully.
El Duderino
2 years ago |Don’t forget that professionally overpriced camera can’t auto focus decently, has meager manual focus (from what I read thus far) just as it’s sibling the x100, where manual focus was even more of a joke.
I’m not even saying the OM-D is better than the x whatever. I’m pointing out for that kind of money, all these f’ups shouldn’t exist. If they were this professional powerhouse you call the, why can’t they fix focus issues from 1 camera to another?
You’re probably right though, focusing is one of those nonsense things.
JimD
2 years ago |Did you get that off the back of the averts.
What is a DSLR anyway? The SLR concept is to show the photographer what the lens sees to enable focus, composure and DOF preview, that is all, the technology of the time when they were introduced, determined a mirror and prism was the best method. Today electronics can read direct off the sensor to create the same result. Don’t try to read anything else into it as there is nothing more. So the E-M5 is in effect an SLR
Martin
2 years ago |I do agree to declaring the E-M5 (and likewise, the GH2 and G3, etc.) effectively being an SLR, except for the “R” in “SLR”, as the MILCs lack a mirror. But they are perfectly SL. In fact, MILCs are the natural evolution of the WYSIWYG concept of SLRs. While SLRs provide accurate preview of framing, focus and DOF, MILCs add to this preview of shutter speed effects, colour rendition, contrast, DR, black-and-white rendering, etc. Which likely means that MILCs will eventually take the market share of SLRs, albeit probably not shortly. Remember that it took more than 2 decades until SLRs pushed rangefinders into a niche market. The reasons were that experienced rangefinder users could rightly claim ability to anticipate most of SLR WYSIWYG information based on their experience, and therefore weren’t willing to compromise on compactness, robustness, shutter latency, operational noise, or even to accept blackout.
Nic
2 years ago |“…not fully understanding the concept to weatherize this type of (clearly non-professional) camera either. ”
I can help you with this. You’re on an expedition (or just on an outdoors trip for a day or three) and you need a small, light, weatherproof camera.
Understand now?
Braun
2 years ago |Overpriced?
With my humble opinions, I’m not so sure which one we call “overpriced”.
With its price tag, does XPRO1 have the following features?
- Lighting-speed auto focus performance with high accuracy
- High-performance and efficient manual focus with focus navigator and confirmation system in both EVF and OVF mode.
- Exceptional, real-time, 3D focus tracking with the support of continuous shooting at all times.
- Image stabilization
- Weather seal system
Ernest
2 years ago |Olympus always has a superb ZUIKO LENSES , i cannot compare that to the others !!
Braun
2 years ago |From a group of M4/3 Zuiko lens, there are only fews that we can call “Superb” (i.e. 12/2, 45/1.8). 17/2.8 is very disappointing.
Kenneth
2 years ago |Do you own these Oly lens? All of M4/3 lens that Oly releases are goosebump awesome. They blow away my every Nano and L lens.
Narretz
2 years ago |More and more, the EM-5 looks like a camera I could see myself using for a long time. Image quality is more than sufficient to me, and then you get a good build, lots of controls, and what’s most important, you already have a good selection of lenses available.
Gunt
2 years ago |Is it just me or the blonde girl has two different makeups in these sample shots? Or is it just the light? Anyway, I much more prefer the rendering of the x-pro1, but I won’t bet a penny this test being much accurate.
Fan
2 years ago |Totally different angles, different shooting style. You can’t compare it. Either camera could have taken the other image too, if the photographer had wanted it.
Florian
2 years ago |Absolutely right. I’d even say the E-M5 shows far more details. May be the harder light though… who knows? Maybe the X1 would show as much detail, if the pictures wasn’t that bright…
Mr Hipsta
2 years ago |You should not compare the pictures like that. As Gabrielle Motola says, it’s not a scientific test. Different lenses, different exposures, different aperture, different camera position and hence different lighting. It’s merely a hint of what these cameras are capable of.
Carlo
2 years ago |It’s a problem of light and aperture. It seem that in the second picture the face is overexposed and the aperture at the maximum (hand is out of focus). To do a right test you have, at least, to use both camera on same conditions.
The photographs are the OM-D EM-5 with the 45mm 1.8 lens at F5 1/200 800ISO and the Fuji X-Pro1 with the 35mm 1.4 at F2 1/125 200ISO
-I will prefer measure with a light-meter and set the exposure (f8 to f11) and speed according to the measure A priority and use a sensibility of 80 to 100 ASA. (And use an umbrella with flash sync).
-Fuji 60mm will be preferable for same focal ( Fuji crop factor of 1.5 and EM-5 crop factor of 2 => 90mm for both)
Rinaldo
2 years ago |m4/3 has its future…
kesztió
2 years ago |Is it just me or the E-M5 has a bit more details (just look over skin texture)?
T-L
2 years ago |I think both pictures were shot with some amount of noise reduction. If you look at other pictures from X Pro1, there are sharp edges but smeared textures. IMO their lenses are not good enough (yet reviews told something else) and there is some kind of selective sharpening in play, making hair and eyelashes sharp, but not able to preserve skin details.
ulli
2 years ago |my first impression was that the E-M5 has a more digital looks as it seems to have some slight halo around the eyelashes( due to subtle sharpening?), but i could be wrong. While the Fuji looks more pleasant because of the f/2 setting? Anyway as the author mentioned, not a regular/scientific test.
TheVoiceoverman
2 years ago |Don’t know if it’s the lighting or the lens but there is FAR more detail in the OM shot. Too much in fact. The Fuji portrait is better because you can’t see every zit, blemish and make-up splodge. But in terms of detail , the Oly is kicking bottom, and that’s at ISO800 compared to the Fuji @ ISO 200, unless I have misunderstood.
Dummy00001
2 years ago |> The Fuji portrait is better [...]
All such photos go straight to post-processing and (most importantly) retouching. Rarely a model’s face shown unretouched.
In my limited experience, it is better to have more detail for retouching. But pros might have different perspective.
TheVoiceoverman
2 years ago |Agreed.
TheVoiceoverman
2 years ago |Actually, looks like the Fuji is focused on the far eye and the skin of her near cheek is soft because of it.
Me
2 years ago |No, it’s because of that:
“The photographs are the OM-D EM-5 with the 45mm 1.8 lens at F5 1/200 800ISO and the Fuji X-Pro1 with the 35mm 1.4 at F2 1/125 200ISO”
F5 is way sharper than F2, especially with the superb 45/1.8. No idea why they didn’t use F1.8 or F2 for the OM-D…
TheVoiceoverman
2 years ago |Ah yes. That would be a factor too. More haste, less speed. My mistake.
inorog
2 years ago |you will be happy to focus at anything with fuji indoors, constant problem I have with my x100…
fan_guo_lai_xiang_xiang
2 years ago |Considering it’s supposed to be full size, the image files appear to be kind of small… anyway, imho great IQ from the EM-5 (of course from the X Pro 1, too)!
I really want one, although I am still reluctant to part with my G3 body after less than a year. Or let’s say my wallet is.
Anyway, m4/3 is back on track.
sneye
2 years ago |Pixel peeper’s heaven.
Why don’t we just relax and enjoy both of these portraits. Either of them is lovely and the gear used is hardly of any significance (to me). The minute differences are clearly more about the optics than the cameras used.
Marcelo Guarini
2 years ago |+1
JimD
2 years ago |The lighting is the main factor.
Ian C
2 years ago |I think the only thing we can conclude from this test is that the person doing it doesn’t know how to do a comparative test.
twoomy
2 years ago |Sometimes in fashion shots, there is TOO MUCH resolution. I don’t really like counting hairs and bumps on faces.
Kylberg
2 years ago |The exposures are different, but the Fuji exposure has a lot more natural look with natural skin tones. The EM5 file looks over processed and plastic, quite ugly at 100%. Looking also at other examples, Oly jpg engine is not as good as the Fuji.
Gabriel
2 years ago |Fuji looks too plastic for me. It’s the casual look and feel for fashion women magazine. But those too shots are good, no/low noise from a µ4/3 at 800iso is a good surprise.
JimD
2 years ago |On the contrary the fuji looks plastic the Oly is to sharp (to sharp). The main difference is the lighting is different, and from different angles.
Matt
2 years ago |I find a lot of the comments on these issues depressing. I don´t get why people can´t just accept that more than one camera can be good at the same time and their personal preferences aren´t what the universe revolves around.
Pros aren´t going to use the EM5. They probably should, it´s just prejudice on their part because for 95% of uses pretty much any modern camera will suffice but they won´t. Neither will many use the Fuji either. Pro/Semi pro are meaningless labels for non pro products.
Neither of these cameras is better than the other. I prefer shooting with a rangefinder type camera after using Voigtlanders and a Hassy Xpan for years. The Fuji offers something closer to that. One offers faster AF one offers a different view finder type. It depends which is personally more useful to you. Nothing to do with being an overpriced fashion gadget. Fashion? People in the real world don´t care. They will look at both these cameras and their retro styling and just think “Oh that´s an old camera, can´t you afford an I phone?”. It´s an inability to accept that other people´s subjective judgements are different that lead to the Spanish Inquisition, for God´s sake. Its ultimately a lack of imagination and insecurity in one´s own choices.
For years the argument against M43 was that it didn´t have enough lenses and now it does its suddenly it´s main strength. We´re only talking about a year ago here. Fuji´s lens map looks good enough and in two years the gap will be closed.
They are both great cameras and most people – people who actually take photos rather than complain on gear forums – would be happy with either.
TheVoiceoverman
2 years ago |Well I agree with your sentiment almost entirely, but then you slightly fall foul of your own argument. If you think that “People in the real world don’t care,” about fashion then you’re sadly mistaken. I dare say many professional photographers don’t care about fashion, and you may be one of them, but the reason both of these cameras look the way they do is to capitalise on the retro wave.
Having said that, your main point is entirely true. You could pretty much use any modern camera and get a great result. And either one of these would be lovely.
Matt
2 years ago |Obviously a lot of people do care about fashion and you´re certainly right about the current retro wave.
What I was trying to say is that, outside camera forums, the vast majority of the non photographer huamn population don´t really care about retro camera aesthetics. After years of lugging a Hasselblad Xpan with me on my travels, I´ve met about three people who´ve seen it and reacted in a semi impressed way, greatly outweighed by the numerous people who´ve asked me if it had belonged to my grandfather or waved mobile phones in my face and said “Get one of these instead mate”. If anyone is planning to buy one to impress people with, my advice would be to spend there money on something else!
The retro thing is partly fashion, but on the other hand if good manual controls and an OVF with frame lines are back in fashion then it´s not a bad thing. Not for everyone, not for every style of photography, but some people prefer working that way. The great thing about the Xpro design for me is what it offers in terms of classic functionality rather than just retro chic.
But it´s horses for courses, isn´t it?
Daemonius
2 years ago |Beauty vs ugly. Sorry X Pro 1 is just ugly.. RF styled camera can be beautiful, just remember L-1 (or its amazing looking variant from Leica). This is not.
IQ seems decent, but lens are “so-so”, unlike Olympus lens. Success wil depend how good it will work with 3rd party lens, like Leica M.
Those photos.. sigh, well some PS work would help.
Oliver
2 years ago |There are highlight clippings on the Fuji. A little bit over exposed maybe.
Agent00soul
2 years ago |Well, at least there are no nail clippings…
Lumix
2 years ago |Although I’m more of Panasonic guy when it comes to M43 I like them both. I’d probably rather have the X-Pro1 of the two, but that’s just because it fits my “shooting style” more. I want M43 to be small and don’t use them with zooms. If I need lots of lenses and zoom I almost always end up dragging my DSLR in stead.
I would love to have the X-Pro1 with the 35mm, but since I own the X100 I don’t need it. But I do want it…
Sunny
2 years ago |Oh no! The skin is shocking! With the high resolution sensors I think we need a new generation of super clear skinned models!
Agent00soul
2 years ago |Ever heard of Photoshop?
Sunny
2 years ago |Yes, I did. And retouching is okay for me, but there you have to restore the skin. I would fire the makeup artist!
Pedro del Río
2 years ago |Yes, in the OM-D enlargement her face looks like the dark side of the moon. Also way too pale a skin, looks sick, has not seen the sun in a while. The photographer did not make her a favour with those pictures.
Anonymous
2 years ago |these two cameras are among the most anticipated new gear of this year as well as many camera base website will review despite of both cons ,.The IQ seems great both of them ,I can hardly tell them the ISO difference between 200-800,.It will be great compliment to put in my arsenal as I ‘ve had Pre-ordered both of them,..
Rob
2 years ago |I was at the focus show and remember this model, she was on a stand demonstrating lighting setup if I remember correctly.
The tutorials there were quite enlightening, and I think these photos match. The lighting for the X Pro 1 is designed to show everything. If that model was looking for a photo to go in a portfolio, she’s be clever to choose this one.
The lighting on the E-M5 makes her look more exotic, the shadows raise her cheekbones for example. If you was a perfume company wanting an advert, then this is the better shot. Although her face could actually do with softening if anything. Especially on the 100% crop, the camera is showing off poorly applied makeup to me more than anything! Which is testament to the quality of the camera, but sometimes thats not quite desired.
As a comparison of cameras, these photos don’t really help us much as they are so different, in lighting, settings and not to mention focal length. The softer lighting on the Fuji will hide the blobs and zits and goosebumps (look at the models arms on the OM-D shot – she’s cold!). The EM-5 looks like its trying too hard to capture detail (directed harsh light on face), although that’s not a bad thing, I do wonder what the noise reduction was set too. It’s not exactly a noisy image, but I wouldn’t mind a soft blur on it from seeing this.
My conclusion is they are both fine cameras and equal a 2-3 year old APS-C or 4-5 year old 35mm full frame camera nicely, which is a great achievement for micro 4/3 (yes I know the Fuji is APS-C). People were taking great photos then, they can do the same now with a smaller sensor
I feel much more confident in moving towards the EM5 now after seeing this. I’m not a consumer that demands the highest quality, my wallet prevents me doing that. But I do like a nice upgrade every few years (and the smaller size is a good upgrade).
If anyone here has read Top Gear Magazine (which has superb photography), they might be surprised to know some of the shots recently were taken with the Fuji X Pro 1 (not the high speed ones though I guess
). Which was presented at Focus. So it’s a bit more than a toy, there is no need to diss it to make you feel better about your EM-5 pre-order.
It still doesn’t change the fact I couldn’t get on with the Fuji X Pro 1, I dont care if its matching Hasselblad portrait cameras for quality, it’s not for me. The EM-5 (with landscape battery grip) suits my needs much better.
It also doesn’t change that any keen amateur (and ‘recent professional’) photographer would probably be better learning about lighting more than they should be upgrading their camera every time a new one comes out.
JimD
2 years ago |Rob, yes. Yes and did I say yes.
Anonymous
2 years ago |take a look at them ,.Panny ,.can you make a better camera,.,..? we’ll see in the next six-ten months ahead,..you have to working very hard to make A very fine camera or just computer toy with a lens again,..the Last one will be the doom of your brand ,./their will put a curse on you
Narretz
2 years ago |ah, we broke the blog. The m43rumors effect!
JesperMP
2 years ago |Why even do such a comparison if not under identical circumstances, scientific or not ?
One is shot at F5 which means too much is in focus, whereas the other is shot at F2 and unfortunately without the focus plane being perfectly in the eyes.
Impossible to use these two images for any comparison.
Fan
2 years ago |I actually enjoy “too much” being in focus. Not EVERY portrait needs a shallow depth of field. It is becoming quite boring.
camerageek
2 years ago |Bwahahahahahaha!!!! The samples here and the Hi ISO samples over at DPReview obviously show the the latest Micro Four Turd “Camera” (and I use that term for this shitbox)Is nowhere near the IQ of the XPro1! All the apologist here such as kesztio and I’m sure Mr. Reek when he shows his face will try their best to make you believe the Olympus insult to the name “camera” is worthy, but let’s face facts!
The IQ is on par with horseshit! It is obviously a trinket for the filthy peasantry who live outside of the great cities where the Photographic Elite with their Godlike skill will use the XPro1! You peasants that live outside of New York, London, Paris, Milan and Tokyo play at photographer with your Oly, while we the Elite who live in the cities where REAL photography is done by REAL photographers is done will use the XPro1 and take PHOTOGRAPHS instead of pictures.
Reply as you wish but realize unless you live in the Elite Photography Cities your opinion and words have zero value as you are merely a peasant taking pictures!
Muahahahahahahhahahahaha!!!!!!!!!!!
thevoiceoverman
2 years ago |I live in London and I still think you’re an idiot. I picture you alone in your hovel, which is somewhere in a provincial town that nobody has heard of, taking pictures in the mirror of your own balding head with a 2.0 Megapixel Cybershot because no living model will pose for you on account of your breath, which reeks of Kraft cheese triangles and rotten teeth. You are sadness personified. Now go back to picking the hard skin off your feet so you can finish that sandwich you were making.
bibi
2 years ago |Fan
2 years ago |I’m sure this is satire, quite good actually! Thanks! Did anybody think this was anything else?
JimD
2 years ago |When you come out of your inhibiting Siberian coal mine and see the world you will be pleasantly surprised at the real people and places that can be found. But in the meantime sit in your dark, dark corner and use your dark dark mind, or at least what there is of it. We all feel very, very, sorry for you, and we all hope you will be free of your torments very soon.
jazzcrab
2 years ago |@All: Please don’t feed the troll!
thevoiceoverman
2 years ago |Robert
2 years ago |planning to get both systems, dont get while there needs to be to field of “cheerers” claiming theirs is the best.
To take pictures and have fun and glad i dont have to expend my time convincing others either is best.
Nowhere Man
2 years ago |I live in a provincial town that noone has heard of.
JimD
2 years ago |Get your camera out and put it on the map.
pdc
2 years ago |This Fuji sets up a bit of angst, for sure.
We all want the best IQ we can afford, but at the end of the day, we also want a system future. Having been invested in m43 for 3 1/2 years, I see continuing commitment to this platform, but if the newer entrants like Fuji (and soon Canon) continue to have an edge in IQ and can also be compact, I may just have to diversify.
I don’t like 3:2 as much as I like 4:3, and so if a future Canon CSC is based on their G1X sensor format, and it is a COMPACT system, they have a better chance of getting their hooks into me.
The future looks bright for us consumers – the manufacturers definitely are being challenged.
Fan
2 years ago |Yeah Canon and Sony are the only potential alternatives to M43.
Marcelo Guarini
2 years ago |What is more significant to me, is that the E-M5 has been in the top two or three positions as the most reviewed camera in DPreview since two ore more weeks ago. Just now is in the top with 7% of reviews, followed by the CanonD5 MKIII with 6.9% . I believe that the E-M5 will be quite a popular camera, which is very good for Olympus.
Jesper
2 years ago |Anyone else get database error when trying to open the page?
JimD
2 years ago |Yes we all went to look at the same time. To much attention.
Ron Zack
2 years ago |I really like the Fuji X-Pro 1, and I think it has a very bright future as a camera system. However, I’m taking a pass on the first iteration, as Fuji just isn’t very good at putting together a complete camera experience, where as Olympus has never faltered, from the E-1 to today’s models, with the possible exception of some of the early iterations of the Pen.
But to be more specific, I totally trust, and I’m completely amazed at the latest version of contrast-detect focusing on the newest Pens –you have to use it for yourself to fully understand what I mean. It’s super fast, super accurate, and never, ever gets in your way.
However, there are still reports that the Fuji contrast-detect focus is a bit sluggish and inaccurate, especially in low-light situations, which means that it will be difficult to fully utilize that wonderful sensor it has. What good is super clean ISO 25,600 if your camera can’t focus properly?
Another example is how Fuji has recently announced that the are developing a modified sensor for the X10 / S1 cameras, as they’ve been totally unable to fix the “white orb” issue with firmware alone. Check out this article in DPReview: http://www.dpreview.com/news/2012/03/12/Fujifil-X10-X-S1-white-disc-cause-and-fixes
Sensors alone do not make for a great camera — you have to take into consideration usability, speed, accuracy, color, lens selection, durability, and other things not always highlighted on a spec sheet. Olympus easily beats Fuji by a country mile when you take all that into consideration, and this is coming from someone who really like Fuji cameras.
Between the E-M5 and the X-Pro 1, I’ll take the E-M5 every time, with the Olympus 12mm f/2, the Lumix 25mm f/1.4, and both the Olympus 45mm f/1.8 and the Lumix 45mm f/2.8 macro.
pdc
2 years ago |And you have to consider size and weight!!
We are talking Compact System Cameras here (CSC), not 35mm rangefinders.
Fuji, Canon and Nikon all fail badly.
Panasonic and Olympus show how to put Compact into CSC!
Sony does Compact in bodies as well as m43, but lenses are a whole other story.
Samsung?, somewhere in the middle.
If you want high IQ and don’t care about size, is not a DSLR a better System buy than Fuji?
Fuji really screwed up by not joining m43 – perhaps Panasonic would not give on whose sensor to use, and Fuji certainly have shown to be innovative in sensor designs, even before the X Pro.
However, m43 has momentum, and it is highly doubtful that the X Pro can give Fuji anything near the same market share.
DR
2 years ago |@pdc
What makes you think that Fuji is looking for (or needs) the same market share as m43?
I see nothing to support that notion. They are making their own way with premium priced cameras, and seem to be doing quite a good job of it so far. Even Fuji was surprised with the success of the X100. I have no doubt that m43 outsells it by a wide margin.
Ron Zack
2 years ago |In all fairness to Fuji, I believe the target they were aiming at is the Leica M9, not the Sony NEX or Olympus Pens. In that regard, I think the camera is quite a success.
Looking at the Fuji spec sheet, there is a lot to like about that camera, but a spec sheet is one thing, actually having to use the thing is quite another.
Pasukun
2 years ago |The link is down, but google cache to the rescue.
http://tinyurl.com/74sn3qn
Ron Zack
2 years ago |Thank you for posting that link. Indeed, both photos look amazing.
But there is one thing that really took me by surprise–the E-M5 absolutely nailed the skin tones of the model, but the Fuji X-Pro 1 rendered her skin with a bit of yellowish tint. That’s a bit better than the orange tint my Lumix gives to people, but not much. I’m surprised because usually Fuji has been known since the days of film for their accurate and pleasing skin tones.
But I must say as an Olympus owner and user, I’ve never, ever had a problem with the way those cameras render people, as long as I got the white balance right. Never any color correction needed. That’s an aspect of Olympus cameras that’s not very well appreciated, but they do a fantastic job with people photography.
Jesper
2 years ago |Thanks!! Ha i’ve been trying to access the site since yesterday!
todd
2 years ago |A camera is a tool you use to make art (or not). A musical instrument is a tool you use to make art (or not). These kind of arguments exist on music gear boards as well and the almost always fail to take into account the fact that a *human* is the one taking the shot, and there is a human-tool interface that is subject to not only objective metrics, but also subjective. And the reality is that most of the tools are so good these days the objective ones almost don’t matter. What does matter is:
a) can I afford it?
b) will it do what *I* want (not what someone else wants)
c) does it inspire me or am I indifferent?
Some people just don’t care about the aesthetics of their tools. And that is…ok. Some people do, and people have different opinions on what looks good. I care a lot about my tools (more so about my basses than my cameras) and what it looks like makes a difference to me. I want to look at it and want to pick it up and play (or shoot). For me, the X1 just doesn’t give me a warm fuzzy. So it doesn’t matter if it has the greatest images in the world (which it doesn’t), it doesn’t scream to me, “hey, take pictures!”. The OM-D otoh, connects with something in me and I want it, and want to use it. Now of course reality may get in the way of my imagined world (as the Buddhists say, expectations are a b***h). And I always reserve judgement on a tool until I get it in my hands. But at least I look at the OM-D and say, “cool – I want it.” I’ve been shooting an nex5n (and waiting on an nex7) and while it makes great images, I have to admit I’m somewhat ambivalent about it. It just doesn’t really speak to me.
There is more to life than specifications. Art isn’t an equation that can be solved…
Esa Tuunanen
2 years ago |> A camera is tool you use to make art
Cameras are exactly that, or at least should be considered as such instead of some decoration.
But you forgot whole other side of photographing: Documenting
Sure there are often lot of similarities and both need knowing how to use your tool but there are also differences.
For example you might make art picture of forest using seconds long exposure while slowly moving toward say some object for getting blurry dream like look but for documenting that picture would be useless.
> c) does it inspire me or am I indifferent?
Add fun/joy of using to that.
In 2003 when buying my first ever camera I was originally considering compact like Canon Powershot G but fortunately ended to bulkier Minolta Dimage 7i.
Comfortable grip and ergonomy along with direct menu free access to most settings made trying different exposures and settings fun along with EVF showing their effect to image without slow exposure “post-view”. Two years later KonicaMinolta A2 upped the game by adding rear dial for full high end controls along with well ahead of its time 920kdot EVF (beat all EVFs&LCDs until Panasonic G1) making all entry level DSLRs feel like crap when tried.
Now m4/3 “high end” bodies like GH2 are uncomfortable to keep in hand and way too much menu based making photography more like getting picture taken fast and that uncomfortable P&S toy away from hand.
That’s why mirrorless hasn’t eaten DSLR sales in Europe and North America.
Mirrorless won’t become the future by trying to beat DSLRs with P&S ergonomy and on screen menu hell controls. Mirrorless needs as good controls and ergonomy to be able to take high end crown from DSLRs. (high end DSLRs used by professionals and most of serious photographers are force behind selling entry level DSLRs for the masses)
> And I always reserve judgement on a tool until I get it in my hands.
If hammer has only 1cm thick handle carpenter knows it’s not going to be good tool already before trying it.
And in case of X-Pro 1 despite of bigger size it plain sucks. That gripless retro brick design is as comfortable to keep in hand as piece of 2×4 plank.
I was actually surprised by how bad ergonomy for size it has when trying it in hand week ago.
But E-M5′s really small size (“hump” is so small you don’t notice it much) made also its ergonomy with horizontal grip not as good as I had expected, and in any case controls are comparable only to E-xxx entry level bodies.
Bob B.
2 years ago |I have been saying since day one that the XPro1′s images are SOFT. They all look soft to me like they have NR smear or something. There is no edge to edges?
www.MilosJanata.com
2 years ago |Comparing completely different images with different lighting with different settings
Fun
Mark
2 years ago |Fuji wins by default just because of the optical view finder. So now we have Epson (old), Leica (too expensive) and Fuji (new with great price and tech).
The others are stuck in the mirrorless swamp of blandness.
Gabi
2 years ago |I would always prefer a good electronic viewfinder (such as in Panasonic G-series or the external Olympus VF-2) with all the important information present to the dark tunnel view of the optical viewfinder of my Canon 350D…
Esa Tuunanen
2 years ago |> The others are stuck in the mirrorless swamp of blandness.
You meant your head is stuck 50 years in the past.
That rangefinder hole doesn’t give view through optics used by actual sensor unlike DSLRs.
And DSLR viewfinder doesn’t show exposure as sensor sees it (sensor captures image, not your eye) and in lower end DLSRs that viewfinder picture isn’t even that big or good.
Sure optical viewfinders have advantages in certain points but saying something is absolutely better simply because it’s optical isn’t valid argument.
Thomas
2 years ago |Uf, sometimes reading these discussions makes me lose faith in something important. Many here sound like kids on a sandbox. Yeah, my dad is way cooler than your dad. Just please admit that both cameras are great in a different way, and move on. Why trying to force one to be better than the other, when they are just different?
I would love to have both cameras! One for my travels and the other one for fun street photography. So instead of bitching, I thank both Fuji and Olympus for making it so hard to choose.
Mark
2 years ago |As long as the electronic view finders continue to suck horribly, “simply because it’s optical” is a very valid argument. Also, for us stuck 50 years in the past, there isn’t a whole lot of options. All you EVF freaks must be in heaven.
Eric
2 years ago |I dont understand why people get sooooooo angry and defensive of these products. These both look like great cameras marketed to a large group of different kinds of individuals.
If you dont like xpro1 auto focus speeed… Dont buy it and stop complaining!!!
If you dont like the em5 limited dof with its smaller sensor….. Dont buy it!!
These are not SLRs stop comparing them to them.
I own a d700,d7000,fuji x100, fujigw690, and two canon fd mount 35mm cameras. THEY ALL HAVE THEIR USES!!
I want quick auto focus speed an automatic focus tracking ill grab an slr.
90% of the rest of the time i spend with my slow ass x100 and my even slower fuji gw690. Hahah i would pay 3000 grand for something like my no meter no electronic gw690 in a digital form with no electronics besides a sensor.
Everyone has their own needs… If the cam doesnt work for you dont buy it.
O and the image samples….. The fuji is focused on the back eye and has different dof then the olympus. Yes, the oly looks like it has more in focus because it does!!!!! Because it has a larger area of focus because of the smaller aperture paired with a smaller sensor.
Aperture and effect on dof is related to sensor or film size.
F3.5 for example will provide very different dof elements from say a 6×9 versus 35mm vs 1.5 crop versus m43.
Chill everyone.
huan
2 years ago |For the price, OM-D is much better for sure. X-Pro seems like aiming Leica lovers. Here is a comparison of two.
http://www.dslrpassion.com/reviews/60-equipment/380-olympus-om-d-e-m5-vs-fujifilm-x-pro1-specs-comparison.html
When you list the pros/cons, you see how good the OM-D is…
Jim Felt
8 months ago |I stopped reading after the first few comments but this is an angel on a pinhead level discussion.
I’ve personally owned, however briefly, every camera and system mentioned. And others as well.
They’re all just tools. Emotionally carpenters get as excited about power saws and exotic metal hammers. And it’s all a waste of time.
Use what you’ve got and find the limits of that before considering whether you’re a gearhead who wants or a photographer who needs something more or different.
I’ve got Hasselblad H series and Canon 5D mk llls and 1Ds mkllls and always try to use my toy EM-5s on appropriate jobs. It’s waaaay more fun. And mirrorless is the future. Might as well embrace it. And most clients NEVER know the source camera format anyway. Or care!
Carry on.