Fuji X100 Vs Olympus E-P3

Macey

Macey

Suspended / Banned
Messages
36
Name
Paul
Edit My Images
No
Of these two cameras. Which would you have ? Discus. :)
 
Last edited:
The X100, why because it has a viewfinder.
 
mastertrinity said:
isn't this just classed as trolling?

Your not actually going to get a close ended question and it's not for any personal use to you apart from the get your post count up.
Click to expand...

Seeing as I'm new to forums I'm not sure what relevance post count has to do with anything

Now as for my personal use... How do you know what I'm to do with any information I receive. As it happens "we" being my partner and I ( just thought I'd clarify for you) are in the process of buying one or the other for her use, as I have already decided upon an eos 7d.

So as for asking the way I have. It is for me to see what those with more knowledge of them have to say about them. So it seems by your response you know about trolling ( whatever that is ) but have little to say about the cameras. So I put it to you.... Are you posting to get your count up? ... No need to answer.

I think I'll look for another forum
 
Macey said:
Seeing as I'm new to forums I'm not sure what relevance post count has to do with anything

Now as for my personal use... How do you know what I'm to do with any information I receive. As it happens "we" being my partner and I ( just thought I'd clarify for you) are in the process of buying one or the other for her use, as I have already decided upon an eos 7d.

So as for asking the way I have. It is for me to see what those with more knowledge of them have to say about them. So it seems by your response you know about trolling ( whatever that is ) but have little to say about the cameras. So I put it to you.... Are you posting to get your count up? ... No need to answer.

I think I'll look for another forum
Click to expand...

actually it's the most relevant because you have a small post count!

you could easily be making random discussions to get the the magical 100 posts for forum selling. Trolling is hard to explain but a good example can be of this.

Also why didn't you mention your thinking about purchasing one in the first place as it would change the whole situation. we'd be asking you questions like;

"what do you want to shoot?" etc

Another thing is I don't need to get my post count up as it's already quite high and I got there through proper comments and posts and not random trolling :nono:
 
mastertrinity said:
actually it's the most relevant because you have a small post count!

you could easily be making random discussions to get the the magical 100 posts for forum selling. Trolling is hard to explain but a good example can be of this.

Also why didn't you mention your thinking about purchasing one in the first place as it would change the whole situation. we'd be asking you questions like;

"what do you want to shoot?" etc

Another thing is I don't need to get my post count up as it's already quite high and I got there through proper comments and posts and not random trolling :nono:
Click to expand...

Look. As I've said I have no idea what the hell a post count has to do with anything... I'm not now nor ever going to be wanting to sell anything so wether I have 1 post or 1000 posts it's of no importance to me.

But thanks ... I'll not ask questions nor post on here.
 
Paul, I think that your post has just been misread - sadly since the new rules over 100 posts there have been some people who have trolled to try and get the required posts to get into the classifieds.
I can tell from your location in Oz that our classifieds would be off little use to you anyway!

Feel free to keep posting and we'll try and help you as much as we can to help you pick something that is going to do what you want!
 
the x100 is uber cool, but you pay the price and probably no better than the Pen image quality wise. If money were no object and I wasn't looking into buying into a system, the I'd get the fuji.
 
LOL It would be a valid point if it were 100 posts required for classifieds access.
As such it isn't.

This forum thrives on discussion so he should be actively encouraged to ask questions. Not discouraged!

Paul, I apologise for the slightly hostile response. We're lovely here really....even mastertrinity :p
Stick around and you'll see :)
 
Danny_Two said:
and probably no better than the Pen image quality wise.
Click to expand...

You can't be serious.

Whilst the micro four thirds range packs some serious photographic clout they just cannot directly compete with larger sensor cameras. I've owned both the GF1 and the Olympus PEN, both provided awesome images but have you seen some of the output from the x100?

According to DXOMark the x100 beats the PEN3 in colour depth, dynamic range and ISO performance - as you'd expect from the larger sensor.

It would seem the deciding factor has to be whether or not your wife would be happy with a fixed focal length. If not then image quality, ISO performance etc would be mute.

Whilst the x100 seems expensive by the time you add additional lenses to the PEN3 it would probably work out just as expensive if not more so.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
It'd have to be the x100 purely for the built in optical finder. Tried several micro four thirds and sold them all because of no viewfinder or the slightly odd electronic viewfinders.
 
Marcel said:
LOL It would be a valid point if it were 100 posts required for classifieds access.
As such it isn't.

This forum thrives on discussion so he should be actively encouraged to ask questions. Not discouraged!

Paul, I apologise for the slightly hostile response. We're lovely here really....even mastertrinity :p
Stick around and you'll see :)
Click to expand...

only on my good days ;) :lol:

Yeah I thought the requirements may have changed but couldn't remember :)
 
gingerweasel said:
You can't be serious.

Whilst the micro four thirds range packs some serious photographic clout they just cannot directly compete with larger sensor cameras. I've owned both the GF1 and the Olympus PEN, both provided awesome images but have you seen some of the output from the x100?

According to DXOMark the x100 beats the PEN3 in colour depth, dynamic range and ISO performance - as you'd expect from the larger sensor.

It would seem the deciding factor has to be whether or not your wife would be happy with a fixed focal length. If not then image quality, ISO performance etc would be mute.

Whilst the x100 seems expensive by the time you add additional lenses to the PEN3 it would probably work out just as expensive if not more so.
Click to expand...

:clap: Well done for looking on the DXO website then. In the real world where people don't look at an image and say 'wow you can tell where DXO got their random numbers from', you will genuinely see little difference (if any) from the vast, vast majority of cameras these days (discounting the terrible range of cheap P&S going around).

The viewfinder accessory for the PEN range is expensive but it would add a new dimension (and a much larger finder than the X100) to your shooting.

There's also the range of lenses to consider, will the user be happy with a single focal length? Some people say this makes them work for their photos in a way you wouldn't have to with more lenses, others argue with more lenses you can have more creativity.

The VF on the Panasonic is said to be pretty rubbish, so I'd probably avoid that if you're interested in Micro 43 and having a view finder.
 
dd1989 said:
:clap: Well done for looking on the DXO website then. In the real world where people don't look at an image and say 'wow you can tell where DXO got their random numbers from', you will genuinely see little difference (if any) from the vast, vast majority of cameras these days (discounting the terrible range of cheap P&S going around).
Click to expand...

I don't think that's fair to be honest. I quoted the DXOMarks because it's more tangible than me just saying the images from the Fuji x100 are better. However I did also allude to the fact that the actual images from the x100 looked much better in the real world.

The fact is I've owned three seperate micro four thirds cameras, a series of semi-professional crop bodies and two full frame bodies. I say this only to illustrate that I'm fully aware of the various sensor formats and their capabilities and to show I am speaking from experience.

Micro four thirds produces excellent results, but anyone who thinks they are on par with any modern crop sensor is fooling themselves. I've owned them, shot with them, and printed from them. Sure if you want to print small sizes then you won't notice a difference in general image detail, but you will notice a difference in how they capture colours and in the way subjects are isolated with shallow depth of field. You will certainly notice one hell of a difference in ISO performance and image detail when enlarging prints. There is a discernible difference.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
DoF isn't an issue with MFT if you're using a fast lens or even if you know what you're doing with a not so fast lens and the right subject, composition etc.

There are f1.4's available now and you can use a manual lens too. I use a 25mm f0.95 and have no problem what so ever getting shallow DoF.

I'd agree that an APS-C sensor should be capable of capturing a better image but my own experience of MFT, APS-C and FF tells me that any difference in colour or contrast or anything like that can be equalised in post capture processing and there's pretty much zero chance of telling what camera took what photo at A4 and some would say (and I believe them...) at A3 either.

Higher ISO is an issue but I'm happy to use MFT at 1600.
 
I would say I've taken some of my most impressive looking shots with an Olympus EP1, having previously had fairly high end Sony and Pentax DSLR's (K20D & A700) - I appreciate that the APS-C sensors in those two are a little older now (2007-2008) but the Micro 4/3 sensor in the EP1 is fairly long in the tooth now as well - although not all that different from the one in the EP3

As long as your not printing massive prints then m4/3 should be fine, have you thought about perhaps the Sony NEX or Samsung NX?

Both also have an APS-C sensor like the X100 but also changeable lenses, no optional viewfinder for the NEX though and the add on one for the Samsung NX100 isn't too good -

Are you set on the form factor of the EP3/X100 or would something like the Panasonic G3 or Samsung NX10/11 with a built in viewfinder do? Certainly the NX10/11 is not much if any bigger than the X100 or even the EP3 once the viewfinder is clipped on
 
Having held an X100 for the first time, along side all the other interchangeable systems including the M9. The Fuji feels like a quality product, somewhere between the rest and the M9, but closer to the M9.
Id imagine the X100 will give your photos a placebo effect just from the way it feels.

Personally I'm waiting a few months before buying it just to see what Sony/anyone else brings out - I'm in no rush.
 
I've owned an E-P1, and currently own a G1 and the X100. I was planning on replacing the G1 with the X100, but decided to hang on to it and the 45-200 so I have some telephoto capability. I'll probably keep both to be honest.
 
K5+20mm? :) Better than either, with viewfinder and built in stabilisation, weather sealed and seriously not much worse weight/size wise than either :)
 
How much larger is the K5 with this lens compared to say an X100, which isn't a small camera.
 
I don't have an X100 unfrotunatelly to compare it with but when I went to see it a few months back it was quite chunky and the lens protruded enough. The K-5 definitely isn't that much bigger though. The 20mm on the K-5 is a pancake lens like the 40mm I am using and also a 70mm which is available. They are all small enough to hide nicely below the internal flash and not protrude any further.
 
From what I've seen a D7000 with 35mm f1.4 wouldn't be much bigger. If I recall correctly even the PEN1 with Panasonic 20mm f1.7 was too big to fit in my jacket pocket.
 
gingerweasel said:
From what I've seen a D7000 with 35mm f1.4 wouldn't be much bigger. If I recall correctly even the PEN1 with Panasonic 20mm f1.7 was too big to fit in my jacket pocket.
Click to expand...

Not really the same setup though with 35mm vs 22mm plus over double the weight. The Pentax would be even heavier aswell plus the lens itself wouldnt be weather sealed.

The main thing that would hold me back from an X100 would be someone else coming out with a similar model but with a selection of changable primes that don't unbalance it like the NEX zooms.
 
Yes, I wasn't sure about the weight as I haven't handled the D7000. As you've said this would be much heavier.

Although you could pickup a 24mm prime (which is slightly smaller than the 35mm DX version) just as cheaply which would put you around the 35mm equivelent.

I have to admit a little bias though, the x100 looks like a fantastic camera. Hopefully we'll see some reasonably priced full frame mirrorless cameras on the market in the next year - for real people who can't afford £8,000 on a basic Leica setup.
 
Moreorless said:
Not really the same setup though with 35mm vs 22mm plus over double the weight. The Pentax would be even heavier aswell plus the lens itself wouldnt be weather sealed.

The main thing that would hold me back from an X100 would be someone else coming out with a similar model but with a selection of changable primes that don't unbalance it like the NEX zooms.
Click to expand...

The D7k would be much bigger as the 35mm is not in any way a small pancake lens. The K-5 is actually nearly 300gr lighter than the D7k and smaller. The 20mm pancake is not much bigger than the lens on the X100 anyway. Yes you do lose the 1.9 aperture but in my eyes still the K-5 is the better deal.
 
I'd probably take the X100 if offered, but really I don't think you can go wrong with either.
 
I had this choice to make and ended up going with the E-P3 due to the changeable lenses. I would have preferred the build quality and viewfinder of the X100, but as I needed a landscape lens and a wildlife lens (System to be used for hiking) the E-P3 became the logical choice. If Fuji bring out a X100 with interchangable lenses however, now that would sway my decision.
 
What about all these focus problems with the X100.They are springing up all over the net.Also quite a few coming up for sale 2nd hand.I think people are buying them and then thinking what the heck have I spent all this money on this for.

Apart from looks what does the x100 offer over other cameras costing no where near the price.It's basically just a very expensive point and shoot.
 
vulcan2912 said:
What about all these focus problems with the X100.They are springing up all over the net.Also quite a few coming up for sale 2nd hand.I think people are buying them and then thinking what the heck have I spent all this money on this for.

Apart from looks what does the x100 offer over other cameras costing no where near the price.It's basically just a very expensive point and shoot.
Click to expand...

I was under the impression that the focus issues had been a problem with the firmware and this was quickly fixed with an update. So this is a non issue.

Whilst I agree it is priced badly you can hardly describe this as an expensive point and shoot. The two formats are nothing alike.
 
vulcan2912 said:
Apart from looks what does the x100 offer over other cameras costing no where near the price.It's basically just a very expensive point and shoot.
Click to expand...

What does it offer that a point and shoot doesn't? :gag:

Well if you can't see it it isn't a camera for you :bang: :lol:
 
It's not up to me mate, let Google be your friend :lol:

Seriously, if you don't see the point of this camera and the opportunities and advantages that it and others something like it offer then they just are not for you.

But this and cameras like it are not overpriced compacts.
 
vulcan2912 said:
Well explain it to me.What does it offer over something of a similar size like the Nikon D3100?
Click to expand...

The 3100 isnt a point and shoot though is it?

I wouldnt say its a similar size to the Nikon either, with a prime lens the 3100 would be a good deal larger and heavier.

I can well see alot of people buying the X100 based on the hype when it doesnt suit there shooting style and then selling it but that doesnt mean it can do what it was designed to well. You obviously pay a bit of a prenium for the design but I don't view it as a massive one given the description of the performance.
 
Last edited:
gingerweasel said:
I was under the impression that the focus issues had been a problem with the firmware and this was quickly fixed with an update. So this is a non issue.

Whilst I agree it is priced badly you can hardly describe this as an expensive point and shoot. The two formats are nothing alike.
Click to expand...

I've owned and shot with my X100 for months now, and I couldn't find any issue with AF even in the original firmware (with the exception of macro mode, but that is seldom used). There just seem to be some people who don't get on with it. I was pleasantly surprised to find it equals or betters both my G9 and S95.

Simply put - the X100 offers the best size to image quality ratio of any camera - period.

That's why plenty of people are willing to pony up the £900 asking price.

I can't imagine not owning one now. There's no way I'd swap it for an E-P3 and have to watch my ISO and try to squeeze it into my pocket with a big, chunky lens attached.

In addition to the near-D700 equivalent sensor - the X100's lens is unbelievably good - for overall sharpness, contrast and resolution, it's on a par with any of my Nikon holy trinity.

The camera rocks. All the negatives people bang on about in internet chatrooms pale into insignificance once you've actually used it.

My D700 stays at home a lot more than it used to, and I never feel I'm having to compromise image quality for portability. All I'm compromising on is variable focal length. You'd be amazed how little that actually matters.

I'm totally not a brand fanboy. I just buy the best camera for the job.
 
Last edited:
SLRist said:
Simply put - the X100 offers the best size to image quality ratio of any camera - period.

That's why plenty of people are willing to pony up the £900 asking price.

I can't imagine not owning one now. There's no way I'd swap it for an E-P3 and have to watch my ISO and try to squeeze it into my pocket with a big, chunky lens attached.

In addition to the near-D700 equivalent sensor - the X100's lens is unbelievably good - for overall sharpness, contrast and resolution, it's on a par with any of my Nikon holy trinity.

The camera rocks. All the negatives people bang on about in internet chatrooms pale into insignificance once you've actually used it.

My D700 stays at home a lot more than it used to, and I never feel I'm having to compromise image quality for portability. All I'm compromising on is variable focal length. You'd be amazed how little that actually matters.

I'm totally not a brand fanboy. I just buy the best camera for the job.
Click to expand...

Fingers in ears "lalalalalala" :lol:
 
SLRist said:
Simply put - the X100 offers the best size to image quality ratio of any camera - period.
Click to expand...

Not sure I'd go that far, but it does seem to be a camera that has captured the imagination. The biggest black mark against it, beside the price, is the inability to change lenses, which will put a lot of people off.
 
But in reality only a few years ago many people with rangefinders or even SLR's only ever had one lens, usually something in the standard range from 35 to 50mm.

I've had two rangefinders, one with a changeable lens and one with a fixed lens and even the changeable lens camera only ever had one lens and this is exactly the approach I've taken with my GF1. It has a 20mm f1.7 attached and I'm very unlikely to use anything else on it. Actually, my first film SLR only ever had one lens on it for something like 25 years.

I don't really see the fixed lens as an issue. It is what it is and if the package is for you that's all that matters.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top