traveler_101
American abroad
Neither. I have been toying with the idea of getting out of digital altogether in favor of b&w with my IIIf (see recent thread). As it is 75% of my time is spent with film. Still a small digital camera with decent resolving power is useful for indoor shots and for general color photography. I don't take digital too seriously and I don't want to invest any additional serious funds into it. I still have the E-P1 with two Panasonic lenses, 14/2.5 and 20/1.7 and I use a ocular viewfinder. Sometimes I shoot with the cheap and surprisingly good Olympus 40-150 tele-zoom or use an OM 50/1.8 mf for indoor portraits. I may get around to replacing the E-P1 with a new mini-Pen with the same new sensor as the OMD. I voted "something else."
OurManInTangier
An Undesirable
Interesting, my experience is similar to traveler_101.
I have sold my (personal) digital gear, including an OM-D system, to go back to film rangefinders (although I'm keeping my X100 so I have something convenient and quick should I need/want it.) The OM-D's smaller sensor/lower IQ thing didn't bother me too much but occasionally I missed, or at least felt I missed, the quality I got from my M9. The real reason for me switching back was I missed the fluidity that an RF gives me and that is very important to me.
I may return to mirrorless digitals in the future, but am for the moment quite happy with the decision I've made.
I have sold my (personal) digital gear, including an OM-D system, to go back to film rangefinders (although I'm keeping my X100 so I have something convenient and quick should I need/want it.) The OM-D's smaller sensor/lower IQ thing didn't bother me too much but occasionally I missed, or at least felt I missed, the quality I got from my M9. The real reason for me switching back was I missed the fluidity that an RF gives me and that is very important to me.
I may return to mirrorless digitals in the future, but am for the moment quite happy with the decision I've made.
zvos1
Well-known
Neither, I still can't get used to EVFs, looking through my M8 optical finder is a pleasure...
rhl-oregon
Cameras Guitars Wonders
My first digital was the Panny G1, my second the EP1. Still have and like the first, esp with the 20 1.7; the Oly went to my son. I tried the OM-D, but as some others have felt and written, OM digital menus are not to my ease or liking.
Now my main digitals are the GXR and XE-1. I'm used to EVF. Because of what the XE-1 can do in low light/high ISO, it spends the most time on my wrist right now. Were I to radically consolidate gear tomorrow, the XE-1 and GXR would keep their places; the main film bodies would be medium format (RF 645, Rolleiflex 2.8D, GW690, Ikonta folder); and I'd keep at my M5 and OM4 for 135.
Now my main digitals are the GXR and XE-1. I'm used to EVF. Because of what the XE-1 can do in low light/high ISO, it spends the most time on my wrist right now. Were I to radically consolidate gear tomorrow, the XE-1 and GXR would keep their places; the main film bodies would be medium format (RF 645, Rolleiflex 2.8D, GW690, Ikonta folder); and I'd keep at my M5 and OM4 for 135.
seakayaker1
Well-known
Use the M9 and GF1 for digital but have been shooting film about 80% of the time over the past 18 months.
If I had to choose between the OMD or XE1, it would be the OMD from the reviews I have read and a recommendations from a friend that is using it.
Its all good, lots of choices and they all can create a great photograph.
If I had to choose between the OMD or XE1, it would be the OMD from the reviews I have read and a recommendations from a friend that is using it.
Its all good, lots of choices and they all can create a great photograph.
RSilva
Member
OMD or Fuji X-E1 is what has been taking my sleep recently.
I have the E-P1 and two of the best m43 lenses so the natural step would be the OMD and that is what I would buy but... I have almost 30 vintage lenses from Contax G, m42 and Minolta systems and I guess the Fuji is the best choice for using them.
Also and still, no 21mm equivalent for the m43 system, what a lack!
Some complain here about the oly menu system, really? Have you tried the super menu layout?
I have the E-P1 and two of the best m43 lenses so the natural step would be the OMD and that is what I would buy but... I have almost 30 vintage lenses from Contax G, m42 and Minolta systems and I guess the Fuji is the best choice for using them.
Also and still, no 21mm equivalent for the m43 system, what a lack!
Some complain here about the oly menu system, really? Have you tried the super menu layout?
Godfrey
somewhat colored
Because I have two entertaining adapted lenses that can only be used on Micro-FourThirds bodies, and I have the Olympus EVF which I use on the Leica X2, I just picked up a used Oly E-PL1 body (with Holga toy lens included). Cost me $114. Might play with it a little bit then sell the whole kit. Don't know yet.
I have no interest in the Fujis. The Oly E-M5 is nice but I'm not thinking of expanding into more or higher end Micro-FourThirds stuff. I just wanted to be able to use my specialty lenses again.
G
kuzano
Veteran
Om Pen....
Om Pen....
Don't get me as a Fuji Hater.
I shoot Fuji 645 film and 690 film (G690bl). Love those BIG negatives and transparencies.
I shoot and have shot S2, S3 and S5 Pros. Would have had an S4, and would jump right on an S6 Pro, if they had not abandoned the Professional DSLR market. Loved the Super CCD sensor, with its rendering of skin and whites, and the wide dynamic range options.
Since then Fuji has shown me nothing but marketing hype, often misleading and super high pricing. Probably will never have my hand wrapped around their overpriced pseudo "range finders"
Because.....
Started shooting Olympus in 1972, and digital with the intro of the Evolt E300 and the Pro E-1 (Kodak sensors). Bought a number of those, and got the PEN E-PL1. (the first digital camera that relieved me of the agony and frustration of RAW and Post Processing because of the sharp, high quality images straight OOC)
I hear comments about all those legacy lenses to be used on the new Fuji's, but I don't see a legacy lens on that list that Olympus digital 4/3 and micro 4/3 was not shooting long before the Fuji "rangepretenders" came on the scene.
Doesn't it just kill you that Fujica/Fujifilm has been making camera's for decades with very accurate and bright mechanical rangefinders on them, up to and including the BESSA III, and yet won't put a real rangefinder on a digital offering!!??
Would love an OM-D, but can get the same new sensor and process engine in the new E-PL5 and E-PM2 for a fraction of the cost NEW compared to the Fuji new list prices.
Money is a big decider for me, and so long as Olympus PENS are kicking Fuji's A$$E$ on Image Quality, for a lot less money, it will continue to be my decisive factor.
Oh. Yes, did y'all read where OM-D EM-5 captured Camera Of The Year for 2012 over at DPreview. You can try, but cannot ignore that trophy.
Om Pen....
Don't get me as a Fuji Hater.
I shoot Fuji 645 film and 690 film (G690bl). Love those BIG negatives and transparencies.
I shoot and have shot S2, S3 and S5 Pros. Would have had an S4, and would jump right on an S6 Pro, if they had not abandoned the Professional DSLR market. Loved the Super CCD sensor, with its rendering of skin and whites, and the wide dynamic range options.
Since then Fuji has shown me nothing but marketing hype, often misleading and super high pricing. Probably will never have my hand wrapped around their overpriced pseudo "range finders"
Because.....
Started shooting Olympus in 1972, and digital with the intro of the Evolt E300 and the Pro E-1 (Kodak sensors). Bought a number of those, and got the PEN E-PL1. (the first digital camera that relieved me of the agony and frustration of RAW and Post Processing because of the sharp, high quality images straight OOC)
I hear comments about all those legacy lenses to be used on the new Fuji's, but I don't see a legacy lens on that list that Olympus digital 4/3 and micro 4/3 was not shooting long before the Fuji "rangepretenders" came on the scene.
Doesn't it just kill you that Fujica/Fujifilm has been making camera's for decades with very accurate and bright mechanical rangefinders on them, up to and including the BESSA III, and yet won't put a real rangefinder on a digital offering!!??
Would love an OM-D, but can get the same new sensor and process engine in the new E-PL5 and E-PM2 for a fraction of the cost NEW compared to the Fuji new list prices.
Money is a big decider for me, and so long as Olympus PENS are kicking Fuji's A$$E$ on Image Quality, for a lot less money, it will continue to be my decisive factor.
Oh. Yes, did y'all read where OM-D EM-5 captured Camera Of The Year for 2012 over at DPreview. You can try, but cannot ignore that trophy.
maggieo
More Deadly
As someone with an M9 and an X100, I found the OM-D to be the perfect compliment to those two cameras, especially since I can use my old Nikkor AiS lenses from the 1980s on the OM-D.
sailor
Well-known
I didn't choose either camera. They are priced in the UK at just above or just below £1000 for the camera and a zoom lens. For £380 I bought a Nikon V1 with 10-30mm and 30-110mm lenses. I have enlarged the V1 files to 18"x12" and the quality is fantastic and could definitely stand further enlargement, so the Nikon outfit is good enough for my needs at a fraction of the cost.
I don't know why so many folk seem to obsess about being able to produce massive prints. If you actually do have a need for huge enlargements on a regular basis, fair enough, but I suspect most folk rarely or never have a need for this. The Nikon V1 is a fantastic walk around camera - it is compact and lightweight and I spend less time post processing the files than with any digital camera I have owned. Nikon is now expanding the lens range and they are comparatively cheap so I have absolutely no regrets.
Here is a recent example.
Broadford Harbour - Isle of Skye. by Elmer Duck, on Flickr
I don't know why so many folk seem to obsess about being able to produce massive prints. If you actually do have a need for huge enlargements on a regular basis, fair enough, but I suspect most folk rarely or never have a need for this. The Nikon V1 is a fantastic walk around camera - it is compact and lightweight and I spend less time post processing the files than with any digital camera I have owned. Nikon is now expanding the lens range and they are comparatively cheap so I have absolutely no regrets.
Here is a recent example.
Broadford Harbour - Isle of Skye. by Elmer Duck, on Flickr
cosmonaut
Well-known
Well I have the Xpro not I can't vote but I prefer the images from the Fuji Xpro and also the lens quality over the Olympus so I would stay put. But the OMD whips it good in performance.
ELS
Member
I have never had either, but wouldn't mind the Olympus OM-D EM-5 to test drive... 
I would "take it easy on the sharp curves" ... (Maybe...) LOL -
I like the body style of the OM-D EM-5...
Ed
I would "take it easy on the sharp curves" ...
(Maybe...) LOL - I like the body style of the OM-D EM-5...
Ed
SausalitoDog
Well-known
OMD seems like a nice system, but I had an x100 and then bought a xp1 (so I say xe1) and don't regret it a bit and would buy another if this one fell in the ocean today.
Fuji seems to really get it - photographer's needs in digital. They have been great with firmware upgrades and a pretty extensive line of lenses now and in the next year.
They are the firm to beat in my book.
Fuji seems to really get it - photographer's needs in digital. They have been great with firmware upgrades and a pretty extensive line of lenses now and in the next year.
They are the firm to beat in my book.
semilog
curmudgeonly optimist
semilog
curmudgeonly optimist
...in answer to the original question:
When my X-Pro1 was stolen I reassessed. I tried the OM-D and also shot the NEX-7 pretty extensively with the Zeiss 24mm lens. I bought an X-E1.
Current rankings (IMO):
1. X-E1
2. NEX-7 (CLOSE second to X-E1 -- almost a tie)
3. X-Pro1
4. OM-D.
When my X-Pro1 was stolen I reassessed. I tried the OM-D and also shot the NEX-7 pretty extensively with the Zeiss 24mm lens. I bought an X-E1.
Current rankings (IMO):
1. X-E1
2. NEX-7 (CLOSE second to X-E1 -- almost a tie)
3. X-Pro1
4. OM-D.
ibcrewin
Ah looky looky
I will continue to shoot 35mm film. But I'm seriously considering ditching my dslr and picking up a x100, just for the size considerations. I'm not giving up on film though. I love the process.
If I had the money I'd get the XE1
If I had the money I'd get the XE1
Don Parsons
Well-known
What sold you on the Fuji's?
What sold you on the Fuji's?
What sold you on the xe1 over the others?
What sold you on the Fuji's?
What sold you on the xe1 over the others?
semilog
curmudgeonly optimist
1. I prefer the "classic" dial setup of the body.
2. I rather like the 28/2 as a near-pancake walk-around lens.
3. At higher ISOs, I like the noise characteristics of the XTRANS sensor a bit more than the Sony Beyer filter CMOS sensors. Chroma noise is extraordinarily low and the remaining luminance noise is exceptionally film-like.
4. I usually shoot RAW+ JPEG. The JPEGs out of the Fujis are about equal to those out of the OM-D and superior to those out of the Sony.
5. The size of the X-E1 hits a sweet spot between my CLE and my M6.
But as I said above all of these cameras are terrific and I am certain that I could be happy with any of them.
kbg32
neo-romanticist
I have both the OMD and the XE-1. I got into the M4/3 system as a compliment to my digital Ms. I was looking for something lighter to approach the quality of and eventually replace my 5Dll for the corporate events that I shoot. The XE-1 has phenomenal IQ, but the OMD is no slouch either. I just wish the Fuji came close to the fast AF of the Olympus.
semilog
curmudgeonly optimist
I tend to shoot in manual focus mode anyway, so it's less of an issue.