from M4/3 to Fuji ?

Sootchucker

Sootchucker

Messages
2,490
Name
Andrew
Edit My Images
No
Hi all. I have quite a nice M4/3 system at present comprising an EM1 (with grip) and a Panasonic GX8. Lens wise I have the "Pro trinity" of Olympus 7-14 F2.8, 12-40 F2.8 & 40-150 F2.8 (with 1.4x Converter), as well as the Panasonic 12-35 F2.8, Olympus 17mm F1.8, Olympus 60mm F2.8 Macro, Panasonic 25mm F1.4 & Panasonic 100-400.

I'm quite keen to see what the new Olympus EM1 Mark II brings to the table with regards C-AF and high ISO noise etc,which are the systems Achilles heel at present, but have been viewing (with a certain degree of envy), some great reviews and beautiful shots taken with the new Fuji X-T2. Not nothing anything really about the Fuji system, what do that have in their range that would be a direct (as near as possible) replacement or the Olympus Pro-Trinity, and do they have anything that goes out to the 800mm of the Panasonic 100-400 ?

I'm not certain I would even change (might have just invested just too much in M4/3), but obviously if I decided to swap systems it would be a gradual transition over several months as I doubt my current set-up would in anyway come anywhere near to financing a gripped X-T2 with suitable lenses, but would be interested to hear comments from people that have made the swap from Micro Four Thirds to Fuji (or vice versa for that matter), and what you found better / worse with each system.

I'll wait until the EM1 II is available for testing early next year before making my mind up, especially as X-T2's are a bit thin on the ground as well at present, but it's something I'm pondering at present.

Finally, is the Fuji system as well rounded at Micro four thirds (lenses, flashes accessories etc) ?

Thanks in advance.
 
I've been considering the same as the XT-2 looks a lovely camera...I'm holding firm for now though.

What do you want to get out of it? As in, what benefits will the move to Fuji (or a.n.other system) give you over what you already have?
 
Mainly for me it's when we go for walks with the dog (a one year old Cocker Spaniel called Charlie). Trying to capture him when he's running about is damn near impossible with the EM1 or the GX8. Also, with the grim lighting in the UK during a large part of the year, I tend to be shooting around ISO800 minimum on the M4/3 bodies - up to about ISO3200, and the quality at these higher ISO's really does start to break apart.

To be fair to M4/3, for what I originally purchased it for, which was as a holiday travel camera (when the light levels are much better and the images tend to be of people, landscapes and architecture), it actually does really well. I'm currently actually carrying the Gripped EM1, GX8, the trinity pro lenses (or the Olympus 40-150 F2.8 pro swapped for the Panasonic 100-400 OIS), my PL 24mm F1.4 and the Oly 17mm F1.8, as well as my surface pro 4 in Lowepro Event messenger 250 shoulder bag, and it all fits in and really doesn't weigh that much, so that is a real advantage of Micro Four thirds I guess.
 
Last edited:
Hi,

I think the main reason people are downgrading to M4/3 systems is their overall size/weight advantages, so if you are willing to give that up and move to a (bigger) APS-C system then I think that Fuji is probably one of the best systems to move to, however it also comes down to cost of changing systems.
Stick to you plan and wait until the new EM1 II comes out and then evaluate.
I nearly moved to the Fuji XT-2 purely for its AF-C abilities but decided I couldn't live with downgrading my lenses and sensor tech.... I am going to wait until Sony crack AF-C / performance niggles.
If you want real useable high (6400) ISO files then Full-Frame is the way to go. :D
 
About 2 years ago I went from Oly m4/3 (and being a mod on an Oly forum) to Fuji X. The main reason was not IQ but ergonomics. My memory not being what it was, I found trying the remember what function I'd assigned to which button frustrating. There was a slight weight disadvantage with the Fuji X, mainly on the lenses, but I've certainly not regretted the move and come to love the more organic feel to Fuji colours and IQ. Though I've been flamed for saying that in another well-known forum.
 
Rizvan said:
Hi,

I think the main reason people are downgrading to M4/3 systems is their overall size/weight advantages,
Click to expand...

Yup.

For me the smaller systems are at their best when coupled with the more compact primes and zooms. I think MFT and probably also APS-C too at least to an extent suffer because of unnecessary pixel peeping. I know we're geeks and can't resist but if we consider the final output and how it's to be viewed I don't think MFT does do too badly... especially if you can ETTR, apply the crop factor by shooting at wider apertures and downsize for viewing / printing. Personally I find the newer MFT bodies I have useable to ISO 25,600. Dunno what the JPEG's are like though as I never bother with them.

Personally I think that these days the main reasons for choosing this or that system should probably be features, available kit and ergonomics rather than finite image quality.

Andrew, Good luck choosing.
:D
 
Hi Andrew,

I've used a fair few cameras from both formats. I currently have the Pen F, omd em5 ii and Fuji X100T. Ive also owned the EM1 and XT1. I did a quite detailed video comparison of the two a couple of years back. Just covering ergonomics, general handling and features.

In my opinion back then the EM1 was the better overall camera. The XT1 wasnt as fast to focus and didnt have as many features such as Ibis, live time etc. The EM1 also has better build quality.

The XT1 has external dials which are nice to use although not as quick for me in real life. The high ISO performance of the XT1 is better though. The Olympus renders landscapes better IMO.

If these all carry over to the mk ii models then if IQ and low light performance are most important the XT2 will win. Handling is subjective but you're used to Olympus so the EM1 II might be easier to transition to. It will also have a new Ibis which works with in lens stabilisation to give 6 stops of stabilisation apparently. Also live time, live bulb and it will probably focus faster although we will have to wait and see.

Both look great cameras and I'll get them both in when the EM1 II is released and review them so if there are any tests that people particularly want to see then let me know and I'll do my best to include them.

As for lenses I guess you'd be looking at the Fuji 10-14, 16-55 and 50-140. Though the wide angle is not weather sealed.

I did a comparison of micro 4/3 vs APS-C cameras today just to see what the differences were. It's not scientific but might be worth a look as it shows the Pen F + 17mm f/1.8 vs thevFuji X100T. It was mainly to see how images from the different formats look. Ie clours, bokeh etc.

Heres a link to it
 
Hi Andrew,

I've used a fair few cameras from both formats. I currently have the Pen F, omd em5 ii and Fuji X100T. Ive also owned the EM1 and XT1. I did a quite detailed video comparison of the two a couple of years back. Just covering ergonomics, general handling and features.

In my opinion back then the EM1 was the better overall camera. The XT1 wasnt as fast to focus and didnt have as many features such as Ibis, live time etc. The EM1 also has better build quality.

The XT1 has external dials which are nice to use although not as quick for me in real life. The high ISO performance of the XT1 is better though. The Olympus renders landscapes better IMO.

If these all carry over to the mk ii models then if IQ and low light performance are most important the XT2 will win. Handling is subjective but you're used to Olympus so the EM1 II might be easier to transition to. It will also have a new Ibis which works with in lens stabilisation to give 6 stops of stabilisation apparently. Also live time, live bulb and it will probably focus faster although we will have to wait and see.

Both look great cameras and I'll get them both in when the EM1 II is released and review them so if there are any tests that people particularly want to see then let me know and I'll do my best to include them.

As for lenses I guess you'd be looking at the Fuji 10-14, 16-55 and 50-140. Though the wide angle is not weather sealed.

I did a comparison of micro 4/3 vs APS-C cameras today just to see what the differences were. It's not scientific but might be worth a look as it shows the Pen F + 17mm f/1.8 vs thevFuji X100T. It was mainly to see how images from the different formats look. Ie clours, bokeh etc.

Heres a link to it
 
davidfleetphoto said:
I did a comparison of micro 4/3 vs APS-C cameras today just to see what the differences were. It's not scientific but might be worth a look as it shows the Pen F + 17mm f/1.8 vs thevFuji X100T. It was mainly to see how images from the different formats look. Ie clours, bokeh etc.

Heres a link to it
Click to expand...

I liked that :D but... a sort of open question...

Is the straight raw and out of the camera JPEG richness really that important when it's relatively easy to move the various sliders a little in your processing software or tweak the in camera JPEG settings a bit to get (more or less) what you'd get from just about any other camera?

When doing my own little comparative tests including when downloading raw's from the usual review sites I just process to taste and look at the final result and a little extra slide of the contrast, saturation or vibrancy slider doesn't bother me unless it goes too far and degrades the image but usually it doesn't.

Do the differences in unprocessed / untweaked files matter all that much?
 
Last edited:
Sootchucker said:
Mainly for me it's when we go for walks with the dog (a one year old Cocker Spaniel called Charlie). Trying to capture him when he's running about is damn near impossible with the EM1 or the GX8. Also, with the grim lighting in the UK during a large part of the year, I tend to be shooting around ISO800 minimum on the M4/3 bodies - up to about ISO3200, and the quality at these higher ISO's really does start to break apart.
<snip>
Click to expand...

No Fuji will help with this - assuming that AF tracking is the problem.

On the other hand, do you not also have a Nikon D810 and D500, plus a bunch of excellent Nikon lenses? In which case, that's the gear you need for Charlie and IMHO, a carrying solution. Suggest a Black Rapid or similar sling strap, plus a Think Tank Speed Freak shoulder/waist bag - transforms carrying a heavy outfit (y)
 
The raw files give you an idea of how the sensor renders without manipulation from the in camera software.

So it gives you a base for comparison.

As you say you can usually tweak raw files in PP to get the look you want but if camera A gets you closer to that look than camera B then it means less work.

Personally Im more interested in the Jpeg output in terms of colour but if I post only Jpegs then some would request raw files too so I added both.
 
I'd also say that a lot of people dont use pp. They just want a camera that takes photos they like straight out of camera.

I think it would be hard to make an Olympus Jpeg look like a Fuji one SOOC or visa versa.

Maybe I should have a go ☺
 
davidfleetphoto said:
The raw files give you an idea of how the sensor renders without manipulation from the in camera software.

So it gives you a base for comparison.

As you say you can usually tweak raw files in PP to get the look you want but if camera A gets you closer to that look than camera B then it means less work.

Personally Im more interested in the Jpeg output in terms of colour but if I post only Jpegs then some would request raw files too so I added both.
Click to expand...

My point is that moving a slider or three to 7 instead of 5 isn't exactly backbreaking work or overly time consuming and may not be the deciding factor when buying into a camera system.

I never bother with JPEG filters so I've no idea if they can be tweaked in camera or if you're stuck with whatever Velvia or any other filter gives you and are unable to tweak the settings further, I just don't know but the last time I did play with (non built in filter) JPEG's it was certainly possible to tweak things like contrast and saturation. I appreciate that in camera JPEG filters may be the deciding factor for others though.

Anyway, to me the final picture that I look at is the important thing.
 
Last edited:
HoppyUK said:
No Fuji will help with this - assuming that AF tracking is the problem.

On the other hand, do you not also have a Nikon D810 and D500, plus a bunch of excellent Nikon lenses? In which case, that's the gear you need for Charlie and IMHO, a carrying solution. Suggest a Black Rapid or similar sling strap, plus a Think Tank Speed Freak shoulder/waist bag - transforms carrying a heavy outfit (y)
Click to expand...

Richard, yes I do but I was keeping them out of the conversation for clarity :D

Basically rather than run two systems (M4/3 and Nikon DSLR), I am wondering if the Fuji X system could replace both in time. Yes I love the Nikon DSLR's when I'm specifically going on a photo shoot and have a car or similar to transport the gear, but for spur of the moment walks and visits to friends etc, (and holidays abroad), that's where the M4/3 system currently gets used. If I'm totally honest, I love both systems, and probably won't change, but seeing the Fuji has given me the "grass is greener" complex :)

Like I said, I'll see what the EM1 II brings to the party and take it from there. Many thanks guys anyway.

@davidfleetphoto - liked the comparison and to be honest, M4/3 doesn't fair as badly as I thought. I bind man on a galloping horse wouldn't' really notice the difference.
 
I'll look after your 7-14 whilst you decide... :olympus:
 
HoppyUK said:
No Fuji will help with this - assuming that AF tracking is the problem.

On the other hand, do you not also have a Nikon D810 and D500, plus a bunch of excellent Nikon lenses? In which case, that's the gear you need for Charlie and IMHO, a carrying solution. Suggest a Black Rapid or similar sling strap, plus a Think Tank Speed Freak shoulder/waist bag - transforms carrying a heavy outfit (y)
Click to expand...
That 'might' be debatable, initial reviews are saying that the AF system on the XT2 is in a different league to other Fujis and getting close to the best DSLRs. I've not tried it though so can only go on other user's comments (y)
 
davidfleetphoto said:
Hi Andrew,

I've used a fair few cameras from both formats. I currently have the Pen F, omd em5 ii and Fuji X100T. Ive also owned the EM1 and XT1. I did a quite detailed video comparison of the two a couple of years back. Just covering ergonomics, general handling and features.

In my opinion back then the EM1 was the better overall camera. The XT1 wasnt as fast to focus and didnt have as many features such as Ibis, live time etc. The EM1 also has better build quality.
Click to expand...

Did you have the XT1 before or after the AF firmware update as it made a huge difference? I've just bought a used XT1 and find AF just as quick as my EM5-II, which I found just as quick as the EM1 (for static subjects). Strangely I think the build of the Fuji is better than the EM1, except for the crappy SD card 'door'.

The Olympus renders landscapes better IMO.
Click to expand...
Again how long ago did you have the Fuji? The reason I ask is that Adobe was known for poor rendering of Fuji files a while ago giving a watercolour/painterly effect, but it is a lot better now. On the whole I find my Fuji renders landscapes better than my Ollies, and shows a touch more detail. That being said Lightroom sometimes still 'plays' up so I've started using aperture again which is much better for the landscape Fuji files. The detail it manages to bring out is insane compared to using lightroom.

For the OP though heavily invested in Olly it would make sense to consider the EM1-II over the XT2 imo, I don't think there'll be enough difference in IQ to justify the change. For which is better in terms of AF we'll have to wait and see.
 
Agreed, it wont be a deciding factor if you shoot raw.
Yes the contrast saturation, sharpness, NR can usually be tweaked in camera but the Jpegs do still have a colour signature (for want of a better phrase).

As long as you get the picture you want then that is the most important thing.

All these cameras are so good right now that you can create good images with any.

The differences tend to matter if you have specific requirements.
 
I had the EM1 and Fuji in 2014. That's why I said 'back then' I thought the EM1 was better because Fuji to their credit does update the firmware with meaningful fearures and improvements.

Just to be clear I'm not Fuji bashing here. I love Fuji, I have had the X100T for nearly 2 years.

I really liked the XT1, I just had to make a choice between it and the EM1 and for general photography felt the EM1 was more rounded.

Would I make the same choice with the mk ii models, I'll review them and find out.

Yes I'm aware of the issues with adobe but never found the X-Trans files to be much of a problem to process. I just felt for landscapes the greens and reds were better on the Olympus.

For people shots Fuji is great.

I'm surprised you think the fuji feels better built. In what way?
Haha yes that SD card door was annoying. Theyve fixed it on the XT2 apparently.

There is nothing wrong with Fuji build quality but IMO they have a slightly hollow feel. Whereas the Olympus cameras feel more solid.
If I had to chose which one would survive extreme conditions and rough usage and my life depended on it, I'd pick the EM1 without doubt.
 
davidfleetphoto said:
I had the EM1 and Fuji in 2014. That's why I said 'back then' I thought the EM1 was better because Fuji to their credit does update the firmware with meaningful fearures and improvements.

Just to be clear I'm not Fuji bashing here. I love Fuji, I have had the X100T for nearly 2 years.

I really liked the XT1, I just had to make a choice between it and the EM1 and for general photography felt the EM1 was more rounded.

Would I make the same choice with the mk ii models, I'll review them and find out.

Yes I'm aware of the issues with adobe but never found the X-Trans files to be much of a problem to process. I just felt for landscapes the greens and reds were better on the Olympus.

For people shots Fuji is great.

I'm surprised you think the fuji feels better built. In what way?
Haha yes that SD card door was annoying. Theyve fixed it on the XT2 apparently.

There is nothing wrong with Fuji build quality but IMO they have a slightly hollow feel. Whereas the Olympus cameras feel more solid.
If I had to chose which one would survive extreme conditions and rough usage and my life depended on it, I'd pick the EM1 without doubt.
Click to expand...
I just felt that the controls, dials etc feel more solid. That being said I have the Graphite SIlver Edition and I know they improved the buttons etc on this compared to the earlier black ones as people complained they felt a bit 'mushy'. Both are solid though and wouldn't complain with either. I thought the EM5-II was a very solid camera too, the only annoyance with that was that the control dials turned too easily and you could easily knock the aperture setting etc without noticing.

As you say though, most cameras these days are top notch and you'd struggle to find much wrong with them. IQ across the systems is getting very close, for example at times I struggled to see any significant IQ difference between me EM5-II and D750.
 
There is defintely a difference in build quality with the X-Pro1 and X-T1. The X-T1 has that weak SD card door, smaller buttons in general, and the D-pad which is not that positive. The X-Pro1, although long in the tooth, has a 'pro' build with just better materials, better buttons, etc. I would hope the X-T2 is a step up from the X-T1 in this regard.
 
Thats interesting about the graphite edition because I've not tried one.

Im testing an EM5 II now alongside the Pen F.
It certainly feels well built. Side by side the Pen F feels snappier in use though. I'm finding a bit of lag switching between the LCD and EVF on the EM5 II which isn't there on the Pen F.

Image quality between the two is very similar.

The IQ at low ISO's is very good on both. In good light Micro 4/3 and larger sensors all perform well.
Micro 4/3 weakness has always been higher ISO's IMO. Pushing 3200 and certainly 6400 and the images start to suffer.

IBIS negates that to some degree for static subjects but doesnt help for anything that moves.
 
I always loved my X Pro1 even with it's faults. There was something special about shooting that camera.
It's so long ago that I can't remember the feel of the buttons compared with the X-T1. I've used far too many different cameras since then
 
davidfleetphoto said:
Thats interesting about the graphite edition because I've not tried one.

Im testing an EM5 II now alongside the Pen F.
It certainly feels well built. Side by side the Pen F feels snappier in use though. I'm finding a bit of lag switching between the LCD and EVF on the EM5 II which isn't there on the Pen F.

Image quality between the two is very similar.

The IQ at low ISO's is very good on both. In good light Micro 4/3 and larger sensors all perform well.
Micro 4/3 weakness has always been higher ISO's IMO. Pushing 3200 and certainly 6400 and the images start to suffer.

IBIS negates that to some degree for static subjects but doesnt help for anything that moves.
Click to expand...
I thought my EM5-II was excellent, except the niggle about the dials I mentioned above. The Pen-F is one sexy looking camera though ;) Not sure I could go back to a smaller viewfinder though.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top