Just today, I read a post over at the SoundImagePlus blog that pretty much explained the reasons why David Taylor-Hughes no longer uses his micro 4/3 gear. My reason's for switching to the Fuji X-System are similar. The reason I switched to micro 4/3 from my Nikon D300, which I was very happy with both operationally and image quality wise, was the weight and size. Carrying the D300 plus lens kit around all day when on vacation was painful. By using the photographic pixel peeping section of the internet I was able to convince myself that four-thirds and then micro four-thirds had the image quality to complete with the D300. I was wrong about that as it turns out, but I had made the commitment and believed that sensor's would improve over time plus lens quality could be exceptional. By the time the OM-D E-M5 was released, I had sold off the Nikon D300 and lenses and then the panasonic G1 and G3 and Olympus E-PL1 to switch to it. It was to be the last camera I bought since I was retiring soon and would no longer have the income to afford this hardware obsessed hobby that digital cameras are. I was pretty happy with the E-M5 results and had acquired over the years some good lenses for it, in particular, the PanaLeica 25MM F1.4 and the Olympus 9-18MM zoom. My gamble on the constant improvement in camera + sensor coupled with the excellent lens selection seemed to pay off. Then I had my E-M5 and it's kit zoom along with a bag and accessories stolen. Just then the E-M1 was a near term future and I decided to wait a bit to replace the E-M5 as I had a cheap E-PM2 with the same sensor in it and still had my high quality lenses.
I then started reading about the Fuji X-System and it's high ISO abilities coupled with a superb line of (affordable) lenses. That got me to thinking about what micro four-thirds still hadn't accomplished compared to the now ancient D300. That was high ISO shooting. As it turns out, I quite like taking available light photo's both for family occasions as well as travel. I am not a strobist. Even with F1.4 the E-M5 shot's at indoor museums and sights needed the ISO cranked up quite high. I had learned that going much beyond ISO 800 was going to yield too much noise for my tastes. That had led to lower shutter speeds and despite excellent image stabilization I had a lot of unusable shots. So that got me to thinking, how much size and weight would I have to sacrifice to move on to the Fuji X-System, and would it's high ISO actually work in practice as well as it did on the Internet pixel peeping comparisons. I did a physical comparison with the E-M5 with the PanaLeica 25MM F1.4 and the Panasonic 14MM F2.5 that I owned. For the Fuji, I used the XE-1 along with the 35MM F1.4 and 18MM F2 as these are basically equivalent (except for depth of field).
| Width | Height | Depth with Lens | Weight with Lens | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| E-M5 + 25mm | 4.8 | 3.5 | 3.9 | 21.1 |
| X-E1 + 35mm | 5.1 | 2.9 | 3.5 | 18.9 |
| E-M5 + 14MM | 4.8 | 3.5 | 2.5 | 16.1 |
| X-E1 + 18MM | 5.1 | 2.9 | 2.8 | 16.4 |
| E-M5 + 75-300 | 4.8 | 3.5 | 6.3 | 29.1 |
| X-E1 + 50-230 | 5.1 | 2.9 | 5.9 | 25.5 |
Suprised? So was I. The situation at the very long end and the very wide end was still going to favor micro four thirds but in the middle where 80% of my shots are taken, well, no sacrifice at all! Being cautious I came up with the idea of buying a Fuji X-M1 plus kit lens that I found at a great price. It would be my high ISO camera if the image quality was good. Not only was the image quality good, it was the equal or better to the E-M5 (at least for my uses) and the high ISO while not quite as noise free as Internet would have you believe, was very good up to ISO 3200 and 6400 in a pinch. Then the X-E2 was released. I pre-ordered it and proceeded to sell everything I could on e-Bay including some legacy Zeiss full frame len's that I was hoping to use on adapters eventually. The X-E2 handling was good enough to compete with the OM-D series and I saw no point in continuing on with micro four-thirds.
Another point that David made was the micro four-thirds gear lost it's value rapidly. That's true for the camera bodies and the kit lens, but not true for the high quality lens line up. I lost a little money on lens sales but between micro four-thirds and Zeiss Contax I was able to buy the X-E2 and the 14MM F2.8 wide angle along with the 18MM F2 to augment the kit zoom. I did not buy any of this new, I got them at demo and used prices, about 80% of new.
It was true that the going price for my E-PM2 and the 14MM F2.5 was so low that it was not worth the effort to put them on e-bay. The E-PM2 and 14MM are actually pocketable, though I find myself using the Fuji's anyway. The X-M1 is almost the same size and 2 Oz heavier than the E-PM2......and there is a nice 27MM Fuji pancake out there that is slightly larger and heavier than the 14MM F2.5 panasonic! Now, what else can I sell on e-bay :)
No comments:
Post a Comment