Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Main Photography Discussion
Olympus vs fugifilm pro level system
Page <<first <prev 3 of 5 next> last>>
Jan 14, 2018 11:17:05   #
LoneRangeFinder Loc: Left field
 
kivis wrote:
I have tried all of these brands. For me a small carry daily rig is the Fuji X-E2s with a Fuji 35/2 WR lens. Photos are magic. Love the controls.


Concur, although I carry mine with the 18-55 “kit”.

Reply
Jan 14, 2018 11:32:37   #
RoadRunner65
 
Let's try this one more time! Check out this article posted by a professional photographer who is giving up his Nikon gear and going to the Fuji system because of neck and back problems!

https://photographylife.com/fuji-x-t2-and-xf-100-400mm-for-bird-photography

Sorry about the moon post.

Reply
Jan 14, 2018 11:55:32   #
SteveLew Loc: Sugar Land, TX
 
I to have moved to a mirrorless camera from a FF DSLR. I to shoot mainly landscape shots and the my FF DSLR with four FF lenses became too heavy for long hikes. After a search, similar to what you should be conducting of mirrorless cameras, I settled on the Fuji XT2. My reasons were it was the only mirrorless camera that had a tactile feel for the camera settings, user friendly menu, a myriad of lenses covering the full gamut of lens range that most lenses are tack sharp and finally the Fuji company releases more upgrades than other mirrorless camera brands that continually renders the XT2 and other Fuji models as renewed cameras.

Reply
 
 
Jan 14, 2018 12:49:45   #
suntouched Loc: Sierra Vista AZ
 
I have a Fuji X-T2 and it's a fine camera. Easy to use, very sophisticated or very simple- your choice. Many customized user settings as well as a "My Menu" which is incredible for finding your most used menu items in seconds. Larger than some of the mirrorless but still in the compact zone. Wonderful landscape lenses that aren't heavy or bulky. I use the 23mm f2 and 35 mm f2 almost exclusively. Noise is well controlled. Several preset film settings to use. It is a bit pricey however.

I also had the Olympus M-5 which was also a very capable camera. I also had the Olympus M-10. They are both on the smaller size and versions 2 and 3 are now available. While both cameras had excellent IQ, I did not like the Olympus menu system- and I opted for a larger camera. Many lenses to choose from though.

You really can't go wrong with Olympus or Panasonic or Sony or Fuji. All are very capable of producing excellent results. Fuji just happened to be the one for me.

Reply
Jan 14, 2018 12:57:05   #
amfoto1 Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA
 
tuthdoc wrote:
Planning to begin buying into one of the systems soon. Your thoughts are welcome! I do all kinds of photography however my first love is landscape photography. I have developed neck and back problems so a lighter system is a must for me.


Size matters! For landscape photography, the larger the sensor, the better. The most serious digital landscape shooters use "medium format". However, even the lightest of the bunch, the sole mirrorless medium format model, the Fuji GFX is probably ruled out by size and weight (2 lb/920 grams with the removable electronic viewfinder, 1.6 lb./740 grams without it), it's $6500 price tag, and it's rather limited lens selection (so far). The GFX is 50+MP GFX with a 43.8 x 32.9mm sensor, 1441 sq mm. (Some other medium format digital vary slightly in sensor size and range up to 80MP resolution.)

Second choice would be "full frame" mirrorless.... which only Sony and Leica currently offer, with sensors measuring 24x36mm (864 sq mm) and with as much as 42MP resolution in some models such as Sony's A7R III. (Note: both also offer APS-C models.) Of course, these can be expected to be larger than the smaller sensor models... but you might want to look and compare closely both with what you have now and with the smaller sensor formats. (For example, a full frame Sony a7R III weighs in at 1.445 lb/657 grams, while an APS-C Fujifilm X-T2 weighs 1.15 lb/507 grams.)

Third choice would be "APS-C" mirrorless.... those measure 23.6 x 15.6mm (368 sq mm) and have 24MP resolution in the most recent models: X-T2, etc. ... Fujifilm has the top APS-C system IMO, while Sony's is probably second. But there are also Leica (quite expensive, both camera and lenses) and Canon (limited lens selection so far, though there are some interesting third party lenses being made for them, as well as a lot of adapters for vintage, manual focus rangefinder lenses).

All Olympus use a slightly smaller "micro Four/Thirds" (also "m4/3") format sensor... those measure 17.3 x 13mm (225 sq mm) and have 20MP in most recent models such as their OM-D E-M1 Mark II. Panasonic uses similar and makes cameras and lenses that can be used interchangeably with Oly. Specifically for landscape photography, I'd have to rank the micro 4/3 sensor Oly and Panasonic in fourth place.

Nikon's mirrorless system are about the smallest of all ILC mirrorless, but will likely be discontinued (actually might already be...) and eventually replaced with a larger sensor model (they say maybe full frame... but who knows!). Nikon 1 models use a so-called 1" sensor, that measures 13.8 x 8.8mm (116 sq mm).... the latest models with 21MP resolution. For lanscape photography, I'd have to rank the sensor cameras (and limited lens selection) last place among interchangeable lens mirrorless cameras.

Finally, look into each system's lens selection carefully. Something that's not often talked about with mirrorless is their very short register (also called flange focal distance... i.e the distance between the flange of the lens mount and the sensor plane where the image/film plane needs to be precisely focused), which is a big part of what allows them be smaller and lighter. Today's APS-C and full frame mirrorless digital often use a register between 17mm and 20mm approx. Even the medium format GFX is only about 27mm. Compare that with DSLRs and film SLRs that commonly use between 40mm and 47mm. Medium format film cameras often had roughly 65mm to more than 100mm register. Even the "mirrorless" of yesteryear... rangefinder cameras, were usually around 28 or 29mm.

Very short lens register makes for some wide angle lens design challenges. And since "landscape photography" often equates with "wide angle", it's something to think about and investigate. Good, thorough reviews of specific lenses should tell you more. Pay special attention to distortion (barrel/pincushion), chromatic aberrations, vignetting and resolution fall off toward the edges and corners of images.

BTW... I used to have back, neck and shoulder problems. I switched to backpacks instead of shoulder bags and upgraded to better quality camera straps such as OpTech... and have a lot less problem. Yeah, I'm still pretty sore and popping some ibuprofen at the end of a 12 hour session... but it's a lot better than it used to be! Plus, as much as I love "big glass", I'm seriously considering replacing 24-70/2.8 with a 24-70/4 and 16-35/2.8 with a 16-35/4! The "slower" lenses are not only smaller and lighter, they're also image stabilized (in the system I use, the f/2.8 lenses aren't) AND less expensive AND sometimes even have better sharpness from corner to corner AND are closer focusing! Higher usable ISO cameras are also making "slower" lenses more viable.

Reply
Jan 14, 2018 13:47:11   #
adm
 
You cannot go wrong with either of them. Many say Fuji and Olympus have the best in-camera color. They are my favorite mirrorless cameras (sorry Sony and Canon). With Fuji, you are trading off slightly increased sensor size for slightly increased size and weight. I went with Olympus due to price and my long-time partiality to Olympus cameras but I would be happy with Fuji all other things being equal.

Reply
Jan 14, 2018 14:54:49   #
suntouched Loc: Sierra Vista AZ
 
I have a Fuji X-T2 and it's a fine camera. Easy to use, very sophisticated or very simple- your choice. Many customized user settings as well as a "My Menu" which is incredible for finding your most used menu items in seconds. Larger than some of the mirrorless but still in the compact zone. Wonderful landscape lenses that aren't heavy or bulky. I use the 23mm f2 and 35 mm f2 almost exclusively. Noise is well controlled. Several preset film settings to use. It is a bit pricey however.

I also had the Olympus M-5 which was also a very capable camera. I also had the Olympus M-10. They are both on the smaller size and versions 2 and 3 are now available. While both cameras had excellent IQ, I did not like the Olympus menu system- and I opted for a larger camera. Many lenses to choose from though.

You really can't go wrong with Olympus or Panasonic or Sony or Fuji. All are very capable of producing excellent results. Fuji just happened to be the one for me.

Reply
 
 
Jan 14, 2018 15:18:15   #
burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC
 
CanonTom wrote:
Regarding your comment of an adapter to use Canon EF lenses on a Micro 4/3 body, would that also apply to Canon EF-S lenses? (Now that I think about it, I think it would take a different adapter for that to work than the EF?? But not sure so please tell me if you can.)


http://www.metabones.com/products/details/MB_EF-m43-BT2

There's a list of tested lenses at the bottom of the page. At least two of them are EF-S.

Reply
Jan 14, 2018 15:29:33   #
GoofyNewfie Loc: Kansas City
 
rjaywallace wrote:
The Fujinon 14mm suggested by OKPhotog is very sharp.


I have one and agree... it’s crazy sharp!

Reply
Jan 14, 2018 16:42:19   #
wdross Loc: Castle Rock, Colorado
 
tuthdoc wrote:
Planning to begin buying into one of the systems soon. Your thoughts are welcome! I do all kinds of photography however my first love is landscape photography. I have developed neck and back problems so a lighter system is a must for me.


One more article which I think you will find worthwhile reading.
https://mirrorlesscomparison.com/fujifilm-vs-olympus/omd-em1-mark-ii-vs-fuji-xt2/
Spoiler Alert: it's all pros and cons with no decisions as to which is best overall.

I only wish I knew of one comparing the Panasonic GH5 and newer Panasonics to the Olympus and Fuji.

Reply
Jan 14, 2018 17:21:36   #
burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC
 
wdross wrote:
One more article which I think you will find worthwhile reading.
https://mirrorlesscomparison.com/fujifilm-vs-olympus/omd-em1-mark-ii-vs-fuji-xt2/
Spoiler Alert: it's all pros and cons with no decisions as to which is best overall.

I only wish I knew of one comparing the Panasonic GH5 and newer Panasonics to the Olympus and Fuji.


Compare the Panasonic Lumix G9 to the Olympus OM-D E-M5 Mark II. (The GH5 is better for video. The new G9 is better for stills. The new GH5s is for low-light video...)

Reply
 
 
Jan 14, 2018 19:01:43   #
Cdouthitt Loc: Traverse City, MI
 
TriX wrote:
On the other hand, APS-C sensors (like the Fuji) generally have better high ISO/low noise performance and dynamic range. It’s all about trade-offs and compromises.


Depends...subject depending (motion) I can generally shoot at a couple iso settings lower due to the superior IS. So it’s really negligible, especially with the 20mp sensor in the em1ii.

Reply
Jan 14, 2018 19:06:42   #
ecurb1105
 
tuthdoc wrote:
Planning to begin buying into one of the systems soon. Your thoughts are welcome! I do all kinds of photography however my first love is landscape photography. I have developed neck and back problems so a lighter system is a must for me.


You're being contradictory here. You say you want lightweight yet a pro system. The only pro system from either manufacturer is the Fuji Medium format.

Reply
Jan 14, 2018 20:28:22   #
TriX Loc: Raleigh, NC
 
Cdouthitt wrote:
Depends...subject depending (motion) I can generally shoot at a couple iso settings lower due to the superior IS. So it’s really negligible, especially with the 20mp sensor in the em1ii.


As you say, depends on the subject. If landscapes and tripods (IS not so important) are your thing, then the larger sensor is a definite improvement. If you’re shooting action, then your shutter speed to freeze the action is likely to be high enough so that camera movement/IS doesn’t matter. That leaves the middle ground where IS is useful, an example being hand held shots with little or slow subject movement. IS is a good feature, and I used to think it was a cure all for slower lenses and smaller sensors, but I find over time that more and more I’m shooting with some of my non IS primes or those with IS turned off when shooting fast action. The one place I really appreciate it is long FL lenses handheld with low/mediocre light and slow subjects.

Reply
Jan 14, 2018 21:35:21   #
burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC
 
ecurb1105 wrote:
You're being contradictory here. You say you want lightweight yet a pro system. The only pro system from either manufacturer is the Fuji Medium format.


That is utter hogwash. And snobbery of the worst kind!

There are many well-known professionals using the XT-2, OM-D E-M1 Mark II, GH5, and various A7 Sony’s. Some of them might surprise you! The Fujifilm medium format is a great machine, but outside a studio or off of a tripod, I’d rather have one of the others.

Reply
Page <<first <prev 3 of 5 next> last>>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main Photography Discussion
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.