Fuji X100 compared to Olympus E-PL2 plus 20mm f/1.7 pancake lens.

Discussion in 'Fuji X100 Forum' started by soundimageplus, May 16, 2011.

  1. soundimageplus

    soundimageplus SC Top Veteran S.C. Charter Member

    578
    Jul 6, 2010
    [​IMG]

    As before a comparison between the Fuji X100 and the Olympus E-PL2, this time fitted with a 20mm f/1.7 lens. (Don't worry there isn't going to be a whole series of these!!)

    As before some samples which have larger sizes on flickr.

    Soundimageplus: Fuji X100 compared to Olympus E-PL2 plus Panasonic 20mm f/1.7

    [​IMG]

    This time, in terms of sharpness, its a lot closer, showing the quality of the 20mm lens. Samples are all at ISO 200 and its quite difficult for me to decide which I like the best.

    Interesting that the 20mm should perform "better" than a £1000 Zeiss lens, but for m4/3 it seems thats the case.

    See what you think.
     
    • Like Like x 8
  2. Andrewteee

    Andrewteee SC All-Pro S.C. Charter Member

    Jul 8, 2010
    That little Panasonic lens always impressed me!
     
  3. Armanius

    Armanius Bring Jack back!

    Jan 11, 2011
    Houston, Texas
    Real Name:
    Jack
    Thanks for the comparison David. After pixel peeping, I like the sharpness of the EPL2 + 20 combo. But I also like the shallow DOF and more pleasant bokeh rendering on the X100. Strangely, looking at in the 1024 pixel version, the X100 seems sharper.

    Also, the focus plane seems to be on the 2nd flower from the right, while the focus plane for the X100 is on the 3rd flower.

    Which color did you find to be more accurate?

    What case is that for the X100? The standard Fuji one?

    Thanks!
     
  4. Lili

    Lili SC Hall of Famer

    Oct 17, 2010
    Dallas, TX
    Real Name:
    Lili
    Wow, I have always heard the 20 was that good and it is!!!
    Very lovely set of shots, showing well the color rendition and metering.

    Edit; forgot to add I prefer the Fuji's Colors, the Fuji's Greens are very verdant/spring like, soothing
     
  5. soundimageplus

    soundimageplus SC Top Veteran S.C. Charter Member

    578
    Jul 6, 2010
    I'm really not sure which I prefer. It varies from shot to shot. These are at ISO 200 and the Fuji is much better at high ISO's but at base ISO its a close call.

    Yes it was windy at the time. They were blowing about like crazy, but it was a good test for how I use the cameras.

    Neither really. The Fuji is too warm and the Olympus has boosted the Purple too much. On balance I prefer the Fuji.

    Yes
     
    • Like Like x 1
  6. BBW

    BBW Administrator Emeritus S.C. Charter Member

    Jul 7, 2010
    betwixt and between
    Real Name:
    BB
    I was fully prepared to like the Olympus with the legendary 20mm better, but happily (from my own self centered point of view), I prefer the X100 pictures - strictly a seat of my paints reaction having looked at them via Flickr.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  7. soundimageplus

    soundimageplus SC Top Veteran S.C. Charter Member

    578
    Jul 6, 2010
    Indeed it is. Its an absolutely stunning lens. The conclusion that seems inescapable is that for m4/3 its a sharper lens than the the Zeiss. The Zeiss is incredibly sharp on a Leica, and I'm not saying the 20mm would be sharper if it could ever fit that camera, but I'd love to find out. Maybe I'll get out the superglue and give it a go!!! (Or probably not)
     
    • Like Like x 2
  8. BBW

    BBW Administrator Emeritus S.C. Charter Member

    Jul 7, 2010
    betwixt and between
    Real Name:
    BB
    It would be interesting, wouldn't it - if it weren't your camera.:wink:
     
    • Like Like x 1
  9. soundimageplus

    soundimageplus SC Top Veteran S.C. Charter Member

    578
    Jul 6, 2010
    I think the conclusion I draw from all of this is that its swings and roundabouts. The Fuji has great high ISO performance and a wonderful viewfinder, and m4/3 has interchangeable lenses and, with certain of those lenses at low ISO's, equally good image quality.

    Whether we'll ever get all of this good stuff combined in one small compact system remains to be seen.

    What it does bring home to me is no matter what I try and use I continually keep coming back to m4/3. It constantly surprises me (though I guess by now it shouldn't) by keeping up with anything that comes out. OK its not great at high ISO's, but thats not a great problem for me personally. I've tried Sony, Samsung and now Fuji but it still remains my core system. In a few days time I may be (D)SLR less for the first time since I started taking photography seriously, and thats due almost entirely to the m4/3 system.

    If someone had told me a couple of years ago that I would be earning my living with these small, light cameras alone I wouldn't have believed them. (OK the Leica is a special case!) Its a testament to just how good they are. There are those who still try to make out that they are little more than toys and many will continue to think that. But without m4/3 we wouldn't have NEX, NX and now the X100. I'm still not convinced companies like Panasonic really know who they are seliing these cameras and lenses too, but as long as they keep making them I'll probably keep on buying them.
     
    • Like Like x 4
  10. wt21

    wt21 SC Hall of Famer

    Aug 15, 2010
    I think the other bit to note (or even hope!) is that maybe Fuji will become a player in small, mirrorless cameras!!! Olympus has lost their moorings it seems (spoken from an EP1 enthusiast). Panasonic (no offense to the G series owners) is really just an electronics company. Sony too. Canon and Nikon seem to cling on to their DSLR business.

    Fuji could be the folks to fill the enthusiast niche with some well performing models at price points better than Leica (they've already indicated more's to come, right?). Here's hoping. At least we know the X100 will force everyone else to up their game!
     
    • Like Like x 3
  11. soundimageplus

    soundimageplus SC Top Veteran S.C. Charter Member

    578
    Jul 6, 2010
    Amen to that.
     
  12. Luckypenguin

    Luckypenguin SC Hall of Famer

    Dec 24, 2010
    Brisbane, Australia
    Real Name:
    Nic
    David, I'm curious what colour/film settings you are using on each camera. Are these just straight RAW outputs? It's funny to see the Olympus output looking the duller of the two!

    In these shots the Fuji seems to be producing more pleasant out-of-focus areas but I'm awarding this one to the amazing little Panny for resolution.
     
  13. soundimageplus

    soundimageplus SC Top Veteran S.C. Charter Member

    578
    Jul 6, 2010
    Straight unaltered out of camera jpgs. Fuji set to Velvia - Olympus to Vivid

     
    • Like Like x 1
  14. Burkey

    Burkey SC Top Veteran Subscribing Member

    609
    Apr 18, 2011
    Northern New England
    Very interesting comparison. Thanks for taking the time to do the shots and post them for review.
    . . . David
     
    • Like Like x 1
  15. Amin Sabet

    Amin Sabet Administrator Moderator

    Jul 3, 2010
    To me, this is a clear TKO by the Panasonic. With further subjects and stopped down, ie typical landscape, I'm guessing it would be otherwise. However, close subjects and near wide open is how I usually use my Lumix 20, and it's very tough to beat under those circumstances.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  16. soundimageplus

    soundimageplus SC Top Veteran S.C. Charter Member

    578
    Jul 6, 2010
    Agreed. I've never used a lens that betters the 20mm at maximum aperture.
     
  17. Amin Sabet

    Amin Sabet Administrator Moderator

    Jul 3, 2010
    Here's what DPReview's Andy Westlake had to say in response to the question, "Wide open is the X100 lens any better or worse than the Panasonic 20mm F1.7?":

     
    • Like Like x 3
  18. Djarum

    Djarum SC All-Pro S.C. Charter Member Subscribing Member

    Jul 10, 2010
    Huntsville, AL
    Real Name:
    Jason
    I'm wonder if, for the price, ifv fuji had to make compromises on lens quality and size. From the samples I've seen of the fuji, I was dissapointed with some of the softness compared to mft images. Then again it allows fuji to make a higher end product down the road with a sharper lens.
     
  19. Amin Sabet

    Amin Sabet Administrator Moderator

    Jul 3, 2010
    I'm sure there were compromises and that price was one of them, but it really seems to have a pleasing character. They made it a full stop faster than the Leica X1 lens (much pricier camera) with arguably nicer out-of-focus rendering than the Panasonic (some say this though I am not yet convinced). Sharpness under some circumstances (close subject wide open) seems like a reasonable tradeoff.
     
  20. silverbullet

    silverbullet SC Regular

    133
    Oct 20, 2010
    Germany
    I guess that in case of the Oly/pana combo much more in-camera-sharpening had happened. We all know that the optical drawbacks from the m4/3 lenses are 'treated' by camera software. Fuji seems to have a more conservative thinking as f.e. Nikon has versus Leica.
     
    • Like Like x 1