OMD-EM5 vs Nex 7 VS X-Pro 1

r1_2010

Hi Guys,

I'm interested to hear from people who own any of these cameras or have first hand experience with any.

I am a beginner hobyist who travels a lot. However I cannot always take my SLR with me due to size etc... I was thinking of buying one these cameras (or if you have better suggestion) and perhaps a 35mm equivalent lens to take away with me. If money stretches perhaps I would buy a long lens also. My favourite types of shots are portrait and landscape!

I love the idea of image quality of an SLR in the body size of a compact.
I have a few questions however...
In terms of image quality , how does the OMD-EM5 compare with the XPro 1 and Nex 7 ... It is the only camera of the three to use a micro four thirds sensor size compared to the larger APS-C sensors in the Sony and Fuji.
Forgive my ignorance (i know quality of glass is also a massive differentiating factor.. but all things equal when you compare body to body... a bigger sensor can capture more information). Is it fair to compare micro four thirds to the much larger APS-C cameras in terms of image quality ?

I have also heard from initial reviews of the Xpro 1 that its write speed is very slow. The image quality is meant to be excellent but with such slow write speeds quite a few early adopters complain of missing shots as a result. Have firmware updates to this camera improved it at all ?

Given the 3 cameras that I have listed here (video is not a high priority but would be nice), which would you choose as a general purpose travel camera that produces excellent IQ ?

Thanks,

R1_2010

cnocbui

I have an E-M5 so I am biased, but not long ago I didn't have one and chose it over both the Nex-7 and XPro-1.

It is generally thought amongst Micro 4/3 users that the E-M5 image quality is on par with the best APS-C cameras, except at really high ISOs, where the physics of larger wells on the larger sensors gives a noise advantage. That is also the realm where the XPro-1 IQ can best the E-M5.

So if you are into using tripods, shooting at very low light levels or printing Mahoosive prints, APS-C and the XPro-1 might be your best choice. For all other shooting conditions and in terms of sheer flexibility and utility, the E-M5 seemed the better choice to me.

Dpreview have tested all three cameras and their studio shot comparison tool will allow you to compare the three: http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/studio-compare#baseDir=%2Freviews_data&cameraDataSubdir=boxshot&indexFileName=boxshotindex.xml&presetsFileName=boxshotpresets.xml&showDescriptions=false&headerTitle=Studio%20scene&headerSubTitle=Standard%20studio%20scene%20comparison&masterCamera=oly_em5&masterSample=p1010003&slotsCount=4&slot0Camera=oly_em5&slot0Sample=p1010003&slot0DisableCameraSelection=true&slot0DisableSampleSelection=true&slot0LinkWithMaster=true&slot1Camera=fujifilm_xpro1&slot1Sample=dscf2008&slot2Camera=sony_nex7&slot2Sample=dsc03024&x=0&y=0

There are M4/3 user forums that have a lot of useful discussion and content - http://www.mu-43.com/forum.php. An oft repeated theme I noticed on the one I used to peruse, when thinking about getting something, was people saying they were either A: no longer using their APS-C or full frame DSLRs anymore, or much, since they got an E-M5, or B: their APS-C , full-frame gear could be found in the for sale threads.

The E-M5 standout features for me are:

1) Lenses
2) Ultrasonic sensor cleaning (I have never seen any blemish on a shot)
3) Lenses
3) Size
4) 5-axis image stabilisation (worth 3-4 stops of ISO, easy)
5) Very, very fast Af
6) A 'really' quiet shutter
7) weather sealed
8) Superior JPEG engine
9) Video quality (Image stabilised, even using legacy MF lenses)

It has many more tricks up it's sleeve, like Live Bulb long exposures etc, etc

There are a host of lenses, both Panasonic and Olympus, for the M 4/3 system available. The really good ones are quite expensive. There are comparatively very few for the N-7 and X-1. In addition, because of the very short flange to sensor distance of the M 4/3 system, you can use almost any manual focus lens made on an E-M5, using an adapter.

Write speed - the E-M5 can shoot 11 fps RAW.

I too wanted a small camera with high IQ for travel, skiing and general use and the E-M5 seemed the best choice for me. You might want to handle one first though, as some people find it too small. The additional grips set is rather expensive, but is of very high quality, maintains the weather sealing and transforms the handling, especially portrait orientation, if long shooting periods are needed.

r1_2010

Thanks cnocbui,

Your post has been very helpful.

I have read about quite a few people moving to micro four thirds.

However, I get the impression that a lot of people who moved to micro four thirds from Olympus and Panasonic did so because there wasn't a compact mirrorless APS-C alternative available from Canon , Nikon and the rest at the time.

Now that there are quite a few APS-C sensor mirrorless cameras available from Sony , Canon, Fuji etc... what i would be worried about is that if I bought a 4/3 sensor camera I would be buying into a limited lens range or worse yet, buying into a format that may change .. i.e. Olympus may jump ship to APS-C size sensors and dump the 4/3 format.

While there are not a huge amount of sony specific Nex lens, you can get adapaters for other lens mounts. The canon EOS-M allows you to use pretty much any lens designed to work with any of their APS-C SLR cameras. So there is a huge range if I go with an APS-C camera. However the reviews for the olympus are astounding. And even the kit lens gets great reviews (i am a hobbyist / beginner).

The Em5 looks to be a beautiful camera and I am hugely tempted. These are just the niggles that I have in the back of my head before i take the plunge.
I suppose in my idea world , I could have the sensor from the X Pro 1 and all the features, quality of the Olympus OM-D EM-5.

BTW, from an image quality point of view, do you notice any difference / much of a perceptable difference from your regular SLR at the higher ISO's ?

Thanks

muppetkiller

I'm in the same boat at the moment ....but after heading into Conns Cameras I think I'm going to go with the Fuji Option.

Mind you I'm undecided between the X-PRO 1 and the XE1

The XE1 is cheaper in the US at $1399 with the Kit lens or $999 for the body.

or if you go onto the Fuji Website you can get the XPRO (refurbished) for 890 euro. Use the code P832A4V3T8MES to get 10% off

http://shop.fujifilm.co.uk/fujifilm-x-pro1-refurb.html

I didn't like the feel of the NEX or EM5

cnocbui

r1_2010 wrote: »

Thanks cnocbui,


Now that there are quite a few APS-C sensor mirrorless cameras available from Sony , Canon, Fuji etc... what i would be worried about is that if I bought a 4/3 sensor camera I would be buying into a limited lens range or worse yet, buying into a format that may change .. i.e. Olympus may jump ship to APS-C size sensors and dump the 4/3 format.

It is very unlikely that Olympus will move to APS-C, given M 4/3 is essentially their invention. The indications are, that Olympus' rivals are moving in their direction, not the other way around. Olympus is the market leader in the mirrorless camera market. Canon and Nikon are playing catch-up.



The whole point of the M4/3 system is to deliver high performance in a small package. Why on earth would Olympus abandon it's market lead and investment, to move to a system where it would have to start from scratch? You can't use M 4/3 lenses with an APS-C sensor because the image circle projected by the lenses is too small to cover the area of an APS-C sensor. APS-C means big chunky lenses, defeating the whole point of what Olympus set out to, and has achieved. The same problem applies to the Fuji and Nex systems- the lenses HAVE to be physically larger because of the larger sensors.

While there are not a huge amount of sony specific Nex lens, you can get adapaters for other lens mounts. The canon EOS-M allows you to use pretty much any lens designed to work with any of their APS-C SLR cameras. So there is a huge range if I go with an APS-C camera. However the reviews for the olympus are astounding. And even the kit lens gets great reviews (i am a hobbyist / beginner).

Again, if you want a small, portable system, why would you be counting on using adapted lenses that are big and heavy?

I can and do use all my Olympus OM mount lenses, but they are comparatively enormous, compared to the kit 12-50mm. AFAIK, you can use more lenses on M 4/3 than any other system using adapters.

There are far more native lenses available to a M 4/3 user than any other mirrorless system. I count 35 lenses as being available: http://www.four-thirds.org/en/microft/lens_chart.html and several more have been announced as forthcoming. Compare that with 11 lenses for the Sony NEX and 5 for the Fuji Xpro-1.

http://store.sony.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/CategoryDisplay?catalogId=10551&storeId=10151&langId=-1&categoryId=8198552921644718503
http://www.fujifilm.com/products/digital_cameras/x/fujifilm_x_pro1/accessories/

The Em5 looks to be a beautiful camera and I am hugely tempted. These are just the niggles that I have in the back of my head before i take the plunge.
I suppose in my idea world , I could have the sensor from the X Pro 1 and all the features, quality of the Olympus OM-D EM-5.

BTW, from an image quality point of view, do you notice any difference / much of a perceptable difference from your regular SLR at the higher ISO's ?

Thanks

Sorry, I don't have a DSLR to compare with. I am one of the 35mm hold-outs and have been using an Olympus OM-4 Ti until I got the E-M5. The E-M5 is a superior photographic tool compared to the 4-Ti, much as it pains me to admit it.

Here are a couple full sized samples taken with the not very highly regarded kit lens, if you want to download and have a look: http://www.sendspace.com/file/r27djb

r1_2010

@cnocbui : Thanks very much for hosting those images. The colour looks really nice and natural. Are you using the kit lens for those shots?
I was wondering how you found the depth of field from the m4/3. Reading in quite a few forums it is supposedly a problem at high ISO's, but i wonder if it is just a tiny niggle that is being bloat well out of proportion. My (basic) understanding is that the 2X crop factor of m4/3 means that you can effectively double the f-stop value marked so you lose the nice bocca effect.
Your point about the number of lenses is very interesting too. I'm not sure I entirely agree with the rest of the market going towards m43. The impression I get is htat the rest of the market is going towards mirrorless but that the different manufacturers have already put their mark in the sand as to where they stand m43 VS APS-C. Since Sony, Canon, Fuji have jumped on the APS-C bandwagon only a matter of time before there is an extensive lens range.
That said I've seen quite a few forums where even 5d Mk3 users are raving about the image quality of the XPRo1 and OMD-EM5 so you are right, quite a few full frame guys are moving to the more compact systems.
BTW since my budget is limited, if I go the OMD route, I was thinking of getting a good 35mm prime lens and/or a good zoom lens for general and telephoto pics. Can you recommend any good lens??
I am hoping to take a visit into Conns cameras tomorrow and give the OMD a whirl.

@muppetkiller: The image quality of the shots I have seen out of the XPro1 / XE1 are first rate. Whatever fuji have done with the sensor, the camera looks to give the closest I've seen to replicating a film effect (if that makes sense). I'm interested to know what lenses you are looking at and if you have test driven one of these yet? The first production models were supposed to have terrible autofocus and manual focus is non existent. However I have found very few (if any) reviews of the XPro 1 since fuji have updated the firmware to version 2 (which is supposed to fix autofocus speed and write issues).

cnocbui

r1_2010 wrote: »

@cnocbui : Thanks very much for hosting those images. The colour looks really nice and natural. Are you using the kit lens for those shots?

Yes, those were taken with the lowly 12-50mm kit lens.

I was wondering how you found the depth of field from the m4/3. Reading in quite a few forums it is supposedly a problem at high ISO's, but i wonder if it is just a tiny niggle that is being bloat well out of proportion. My (basic) understanding is that the 2X crop factor of m4/3 means that you can effectively double the f-stop value marked so you lose the nice bocca effect.

I find that if I stick a fast lens on, M 4/3 is fine as far as being able to achieve a shallow depth of field, like so:



Bokeh is a Japanese word used to denote the quality of the out of focus areas. The above image has pleasing Bokeh.

The 2X crop factor is only relevant when using 35mm lenses via an adapter. It does not apply to native lenses. Depth of field is related to the aperture, not ISO. But, yes, for a given aperture, you will have a greater depth of field on M 4/3 than APS-C...and APS-C will have the same 'problem' compared with full frame, which will have the same problem when compared medium format.

Your point about the number of lenses is very interesting too. I'm not sure I entirely agree with the rest of the market going towards m43.

I put that rather badly, I meant towards smaller sensors, form factors in general.

The impression I get is htat the rest of the market is going towards mirrorless but that the different manufacturers have already put their mark in the sand as to where they stand m43 VS APS-C. Since Sony, Canon, Fuji have jumped on the APS-C bandwagon only a matter of time before there is an extensive lens range.
That said I've seen quite a few forums where even 5d Mk3 users are raving about the image quality of the XPRo1 and OMD-EM5 so you are right, quite a few full frame guys are moving to the more compact systems.
BTW since my budget is limited, if I go the OMD route, I was thinking of getting a good 35mm prime lens and/or a good zoom lens for general and telephoto pics. Can you recommend any good lens??
I am hoping to take a visit into Conns cameras tomorrow and give the OMD a whirl.

For M 4/3, presuming you mean 35mm equivalent, I would recommend the new Oly 17mm f1.8 which has received fairly favourable reviews and which has good edge sharpness, acording to the MTF curves. I am probably not the best person to advise on zooms. I am perfectly happy with the 12-50 kit lens at the moment. Panasonic have recently introduced the 12-35 f2.8 and 45-175mm f4-5.6 X zooms which are pretty good, but pricy.

Speaking of the kit zoom, I just came across this : http://www.forbes.com/sites/jackforster/2012/11/18/retro-rocket-technology-backlash-and-the-olympus-om-d-em-5/

For short telephoto, potraiture, The Olympus 75mm f1.8 is the one. Simply one of the finest lenses ever made - regardless of system or manufacturer.

gloobag

All I'll say is, don't bother with the X-Pro1. I got the Fuji XE-1 and 35mm f/1.4 lens about a month ago and it has quickly become one of my favorite cameras to shoot with. Coming from someone who also owns the X100, I don't miss the OVF one bit. All the initial bugs with the X100 have been fixed via firmware updates by now, and I haven't noticed any problems with the XE-1 so far.

However, anyone that says it can outperform the likes of a 5DmkIII (which I also own) or similar is deluded. Lets just say, AF is not one of the X-series strong points, but it's not the worst, and they do give you a ton of focus points, which makes composing even at wide apertures fairly easy. It does get you quite close in terms of quality/ISO performance though, and in such a tiny package. Ideal for location work.

It just needs a couple more lenses, which are coming according to Fuji.

cnocbui

Forgewire

r1_2010 wrote: »

Hi Guys,

I'm interested to hear from people who own any of these cameras or have first hand experience with any.

I am a beginner hobyist who travels a lot. However I cannot always take my SLR with me due to size etc... I was thinking of buying one these cameras (or if you have better suggestion) and perhaps a 35mm equivalent lens to take away with me. If money stretches perhaps I would buy a long lens also. My favourite types of shots are portrait and landscape!

I love the idea of image quality of an SLR in the body size of a compact.
I have a few questions however...
In terms of image quality , how does the OMD-EM5 compare with the XPro 1 and Nex 7 ... It is the only camera of the three to use a micro four thirds sensor size compared to the larger APS-C sensors in the Sony and Fuji.
Forgive my ignorance (i know quality of glass is also a massive differentiating factor.. but all things equal when you compare body to body... a bigger sensor can capture more information). Is it fair to compare micro four thirds to the much larger APS-C cameras in terms of image quality ?

I have also heard from initial reviews of the Xpro 1 that its write speed is very slow. The image quality is meant to be excellent but with such slow write speeds quite a few early adopters complain of missing shots as a result. Have firmware updates to this camera improved it at all ?

Given the 3 cameras that I have listed here (video is not a high priority but would be nice), which would you choose as a general purpose travel camera that produces excellent IQ ?

Thanks,

R1_2010

I've got NEX5N and NEX6 and both had problem with lens connection.
The lenses (Sony original) slightly wiggles around the camera body and make clicking soung esp when rotated to zoom in/out. Ocasionally it causes focus/aperture to be freezed, if camera recording video it stops on its own.
Sometimes it says "lens is not attached properly"
Both cameras sent back to the sellers.
I also checked my friend's NEX5 camera, and again lens wiggles aroud the body. Sony customer service offered to send it (brand new camera) for repair(!) but I prefered to get my money back.
Sony should recalled them all.

I'm waiting for OMD EM5 now to arrive, I had Oly in the past and it never let me down