Fixed lens small sensor versus M43

Discussion in 'Olympus' started by wolfie, Sep 8, 2011.

  1. wolfie

    wolfie SC Veteran

    Sep 19, 2010
    Another entertaining video from DigitalRev features an in-house punch up between the Panny LX5 v Panny GF3

    • Like Like x 2
  2. BillN

    BillN SC Hall of Famer Subscribing Member

    Aug 25, 2010
    S W France
    back to where we started, (with M43) - still unbeatable as an all round "package" - size, IQ, portability, ISO performance, lens interchangeability, (some) lens and the use of old "legacy" glass - plus the swivel screen on the Panasonic

    I still use the G1 and EP-1 so cannot comment on the newer models - (but my main criticism is the UI - if only it were like my D300 or even my M8, I would be happier)
    • Like Like x 1
  3. Djarum

    Djarum SC All-Pro

    Jul 10, 2010
    Huntsville, AL
    My thoughts on this:

    I've been using an e-p1 for a while now, almost 2 years. I picked up a e-pl2 on a clearance deal. Cheaper than the going price of the LX5. The better half asked me why I did that, since I had been looking at supplementing my E-P1 with an X2-1 or LX5 (or even the Fuji X10). I use the kit zoom about 60-70 percent of the time on my E-P1. The 17mm the other 20 percent, and the 40-150 anotehr 10-15 percent. To the point I suppose is that, if a user just wants to use the kit zoom on a mFT camera, I think they'd be better off buying an Xz-1 or LX5. The lens on these cameras are fast enough to make up the ISO stop difference in terms of noise. The mFT will give better dynamic range, but I don't know if the jpeg shooter(like myself) would notice the difference. For myself, it just comes down to the other advantages that mFT, or more precisely, the E-pl2 has over the advanced compacts. Even if I did keep the kit lens on most of the time, there are more things I like about it over the LX5 , XZ-1 , s95.