X Trans vs OMD

Discussion in 'Open Discussion' started by WT21, Jun 17, 2013.

  1. WT21

    WT21 FujiXspot Regular

    166
    Feb 1, 2013
    X Trans vs OMD??

    OK, so over at mu-43, there are all sorts of postings about how you can tell even at 1200 resolution that Fujis are better, etc. etc. etc. Frankly, it's making the place kind of depressing, with threads showing up like "will m43 survive to 2018" and "why did you choose m43, and will you stick with it." etc.

    Here's another person declaring Fuji is better. Why you choose M4/3 & will you stick with it? - Page 9 - Micro Four Thirds User Forum

    All sorts of declarations, and statements on what is obvious. Yet, no one's done a direct compare, with pics. ( I'm not talk brick walls, but maybe real landscape shots, or portrait shots.

    There's got to be OMD users here -- let's see how much better the Fuji's really are. I went to a camera store last week, and did test shots of an XE1 vs. my OMD, and while the XE1 squeaked out marginally better IQ, it wasn't "completely obvious" though store lighting is not great. I ran test shots last fall, and had the same conclusion, using a rented XE1 inside my kitchen. Someone said "sure, that kind of subject (still lifes in the house) won't show off the best of XTrans anyway."

    Maybe someone here can drive home the point? Show some real demonstration how Fujis are better? Maybe someone who knows how to post produce both file types to their max potential?
     
  2. Mikey

    Mikey FujiXspot Veteran

    277
    May 15, 2013
    Louisville, KY
    WT21,

    Hi! I sold my OM-D so I can't offer any direct comparison shots for you. I have, however, gone back and reshot a couple of my nighttime shots from when I have my OM-D and I do think the IQ is better -- I can see finer details. I don't agree though that it's "completely obvious". My personal analogy is that it's just like comparing the iPad 3 to the iPad with retina display -- you don't realize the difference until you see them next to each other and that's when you realize that it really is there. Honestly, if I could afford to keep both systems, I would.

    Edit: A sort of apples and oranges example. Best I could do, sorry.

    Times Square -- I've never been able to get a great looking handheld photo without doing quite a bit of PP with my OM-D (1st image). On the other hand, this Fuji image (2nd image) only needed a bump in exposure and clarity. Not the exact same pictures, I know but for me the difference in finer detail is apparent.

    http://www.fotoblur.com/images/537609

    https://www.fujixspot.com/members/mikey/albums/mikey-s-x-e1/1936-times/
     
  3. drewbot

    drewbot FujiXspot Regular

    138
    Feb 1, 2013
    Toronto
    X-Trans vs. Conventional 4/3rds sized Bayer sensor

    Your test shots basically tell the story already. The difference is marginal.

    If I was a pixel peeping, over-sharpening, detail-loving man I wouldn't go with the Fuji. RAW for X-Trans isn't 100%. It's close but there are still some issues that are discussed at length. The OM-D responds to RAW treatment more "typically" since it has a typical sensor CFA.

    However, there is a feeling to these RAWs when I first open them that I can only describe as "depth". There is simply more to work with. I do not have any other APS-C body to determine if this is a function of a larger sensor, X-Trans CFA, or both.

    While my OM-D RAWs can be made pixel sharp, noise free through NR, they feel limp in comparison. And that's OK with me. It's a great starting point for RAW.

    Low ISOs: Basically a wash for any current generation camera. Unless your exposure is totally off or are overcooking the file, the differences won't be visible unless you love pixel peeping to > 100%.
    High ISOs: The Fuji X-Trans pulls ahead, but through careful RAW treatment the files can look identical.

    A camera isn't just a sensor - all the components of the Fuji X system vs. the MFT system add to the final output. If you take photos of still life as you mentioned, the IBIS of the OM-D can keep your ISO lower than the Fuji and still get acceptable pixel sharpness.
     
  4. Gary

    Gary FujiXspot Top Veteran

    698
    Feb 15, 2013
    SoCal
    Gary
    The difference is subtle, but for me the differences is twofold, IQ and Handling/performance. 1) The OM-D files looks digital-ish. The Fuji images looks filmesque. 2) The OM-D is lightening quick and responsive. The OM-D is so quick to use that one can shoot in a reactionary mode and still get 'The Shot', the defining image. The Fuji is much slower in use. A fraction of a second slower AF, but that fraction is a day and night difference. One has to shoot in an anticipatory mode, a lot more thinking and a lot more fiddling with settings because you're giving each image more thought. A much different photographic experience.

    The two cameras are difference, one camera isn't different good or different bad over the other ... just different. If I'm shooting action/photojournalism stuff. Stuff where the subject is moving, or I'm moving or both ... it's the OM-D. If I'm shooting stuff that isn't moving, or moving slowly like Street, then it's the Fuji's.

    The OM-D is this cold, hard, little jewel of a camera. An unfeeling mechanical killer of a camera, capable of nailing any shot in any genre. The Fuji is this warm, extremely good looking, good feeling camera. Sorta like being with the cutest girl in school. Not the fastest AF, a little light on lenses, but all the shortcomings are more than made up for because it feels so good to hold, to squeeze, to release the shutter. Both the OM-D and the Fuji will deliver a world class image, but so will many other cameras. For me, the primary reason I shoot Fuji, is for the photographic experience the Fuji projects. If I had to choose between the two systems, I'd have to pick the OM-D for its brute speed and versatility. But I am still low on the learning curve with Fuji.

    Gary
     
  5. Tdp

    Tdp Guest

    Due to the sheer popularity and discussions of both, it is safe to assume both are awesome - one may appeal to some folks than others. No biggie.

    I'm on a week long vacation and due to the low size and weight, I brought both the EM5 and XE1.
     
  6. taz98spin

    taz98spin FujiXspot Top Veteran

    523
    Feb 1, 2013
    New York, NY
    TAZ
    I feel the tread should be titled X Trans vs Micro Four Thirds.

    As for me, I do not own an OMD but only a E-PM2, which most of you all know it has the same filter.
    However, when I got to handle a fellow mu-43 user's OMD, I was glad that I passed on the OMD.

    I wish I could share my facebook album here.. (I have 46 albums.. and counting..)
    I use the same exact processing action in PS for all my shots.
    I can tell the difference, plus some of my Canon shooting photographer friends enjoy to play the "guess what camera Taz shot with game"

    For me the X-Trans sensor provides more pleasing skin tones and colors.
    & that is why the FujiFilm system will and continue to be my main camera.

    I love the Micro Four Thirds format.. even recently bought the highly hyped 75/1.8 lens in an attempt to rekindle my love with Micro Four Thirds.. but even with the new lens, my option has not changed..
     
  7. WT21

    WT21 FujiXspot Regular

    166
    Feb 1, 2013
    Let's see it! :) Let's see "digital vs. filmesque" and lets see better skin tones, and let's see better colors. And yes, EPM2 images would suffice, given it's the same sensor. Please hurry, though, the Fuji discounts won't last forever!
     
  8. taz98spin

    taz98spin FujiXspot Top Veteran

    523
    Feb 1, 2013
    New York, NY
    TAZ
    Let me figure out how to share fb photos, brb!
     
  9. taz98spin

    taz98spin FujiXspot Top Veteran

    523
    Feb 1, 2013
    New York, NY
    TAZ
    Damn Hotel wifi dropped me..!!
    I can't share fb images without changing my privacy settings & my Flickr account does not have many shots taken with the E-PM2 because I don't find the images that pleasing..
    I was searching from my photo stream & found similar lighting conditions to show you but not sure if this will work but here they are
     
  10. taz98spin

    taz98spin FujiXspot Top Veteran

    523
    Feb 1, 2013
    New York, NY
    TAZ
    Sorry, using the App on my iPhone & not sure why the link isn't showing ImageUploadedByFujiXspot1371553817.347356.
     
  11. taz98spin

    taz98spin FujiXspot Top Veteran

    523
    Feb 1, 2013
    New York, NY
    TAZ
    ImageUploadedByFujiXspot1371554006.235863.
    ImageUploadedByFujiXspot1371554102.117707.

    3images with the E-PM2
     
  12. taz98spin

    taz98spin FujiXspot Top Veteran

    523
    Feb 1, 2013
    New York, NY
    TAZ
    Images with the X-Pro1
    ImageUploadedByFujiXspot1371554359.551892.

    Inside a restaurant, that's the only 1 I've uploaded to Flickr

    Once I get back from vacation, I can add more, since I don't have my external drive with me.

    Hope this helps!
     
  13. Mikey

    Mikey FujiXspot Veteran

    277
    May 15, 2013
    Louisville, KY
    I completely agree with the more natural skin tones and I'll also add more accurate auto WB, especially with indoor lighting. Now, I can't provide examples because I've fixed every single shot I have from OM-D in post. Or wait, maybe I can. I just have to go back and reset the WB. I'll try to do that by this afternoon.
     
  14. Tdp

    Tdp Guest

    I am the owner of:

    5D2
    550D (called a kiss something or digital rebel something depending on where you live)
    Nikon F3 (uses an odd analog media canister thingie)
    EM5
    EPL5 (the wife's camera, as is the 550D)
    XE1

    And some great lenses to go along with each. I shoot almost every day, it is one thing I really really enjoy doing.

    If my house was robbed and all the cameras gone I would buy another Fuji and be quite content. Well, until I found a good working Nikon F-something to add to the mix :)

    It seems people that have shot a lot with a lot of mixed gear like the X100s, XE1 or X1Pro. No reason that should bother anyone, it is just the way it is. I like the XE1 for its manual setting simplicity, size/weight and image output.

    I'm on vacation with just an iPad and I don't shoot jpg, and vacations aren't for camera testing this vs that - when I get back I will post some images but realize single system users are going to prefer the results of their given camera, naturally.
     
  15. Gary

    Gary FujiXspot Top Veteran

    698
    Feb 15, 2013
    SoCal
    Gary
    Again ...
     
  16. romi.gilles

    romi.gilles FujiXspot Top Veteran

    654
    May 17, 2013
    back in Crooklyn
    i don't really care for m4/3, myself, but don't forget what the sony/oly partnership will bring - sonys with oly's IS & fast AF tech + zuiko lens tech and olys with sony's sensor tech. maybe they might just merge into one, or maybe not.

    dang, i can't wait for the next FF alpha.

    (Sent from my EVO via Tapatalk)
     
  17. Hyubie

    Hyubie FujiXspot Veteran

    206
    Feb 4, 2013
    Weymouth, MA
    Bill -


    Don't jump into those mu-43 threads! :) I opened them (and might have replied when it was just starting), but as soon as I see the page count go up to > 3, I just avoid it. There's a repetetiveness to it that boils down to (IMO) some people being insecure with their gear. I would love to own both, but when I was thinking of upgrading my E-PL3 to the OM-D, the X-E1 came calling. I had a very good experience with the X10 and loved Fuji's sensor, so I thought I'd give it a try. And you know the rest.

    I am happy with my E-PL3. I am happy with my X-E1. If I had to choose only one, I'd go for the OM-D for the type of shooting I do. (And that choice probably would have bled me half of my blood supply. :D) Fortunately I can keep both.

    As to your original question - I may have told you this already - the skin tones are very good in Fuji. The handling is much better with legacy glass too. Bokeh is very smooth with the 35mm. But I miss a lot of shots. :)
     
  18. Tdp

    Tdp Guest

    Work hard play hard. This time it is Phuket.
     
  19. ean10775

    ean10775 FujiXspot Top Veteran

    885
    Feb 13, 2013
    Cleveland, OH
    Eric
    For me its less about high ISO noise, DR, or resolution - I've just never been crazy about how 'digital' many m43 files tend to look (as Gary said), but I think a lot of that has to do with the lenses as opposed to the sensor. This is why I never really got more into m43 after my E-PL1. Initially I wasn't terribly crazy about what I was getting from my X100S - oversharpened and bordering on looking like HDR, but then I realized I was trying to process the RAF files the same way I'd process RAW files from my 5DII or E-PL1 and that just makes a mess of things.
     
  20. bhupinder2002

    bhupinder2002 FujiXspot Regular

    101
    Mar 30, 2013
    Sorry mate.. These pics are horrible and even 4 year old EPL1 with Oly 45 mm , PL 25 mm and Oly 75 mm can give u better skin tones n better pics than these ones . Lets accept this gracefully that current MFT is at par with many APS-C sensor cameras . There is no shame or harm in this . We all are different and our choices are different . At the end of the story what cameras do ? They just take pictures.. If someone is able to prove Fuji X trans is slightly better at ISO 6400 then tell me
    How many times we shoot at 6400? All cameras will produce different pictures, different looks n different skin tones.. It's all upto us to decide what does please us .. I am sorry but I am not being rude but the examples u have shown don't show any huge advantage