Fuji xe3 vs Olympus pen f

Fuji xe3 with 27mm 2.8 vs olympus pen f with Panasonic 20mm 1.7. I am after a small and light outfit to carry everywhere. A larger sensor vs ibis - which would you go for? I can't decide.

I am/have been in the same dilemma. I've never used either the X-E3 nor the PEN-f, but I have both Fuji and micro 4/3 kit. Personally, I've decided to concentrate on Fuji, the bigger sensor plus x-trans swings it for me, but I have no experience of IBIS. I don't rate in lens stabilisation at all, didn't seem to help on my Panasonic m4/3 gear.

 

I can handhold a good stop or two better than 1/fl, most of the time. If in doubt, I fire off a burst of five or so frames, generally get a couple of sharp ones.

 

I have a Fuji X-T2 as my primary camera, so I'm seriously looking at getting the X-E3 as a second body with the same sensor, the plan being to use the 23/2 on the X-E3 and the 50/2 on the X-T2. I'd get an X-Pro2, but it's out of my budget.

 

The current bargain price of the X-E3 is hard to ignore. The Fuji 27mm lens is also currently available for a lot less than the Panasonic 20mm, new.

 

My current 'walk around camera' is a Fuji X-T10 with a 7artisans 35/1.2 lens. I value the extra speed over the 27/2.8 and it's not much bigger.

 

I'm considering getting the 27/2.8 anyway, as it can be had for 160€ new, to put on my X-E1 and give me a pocketable combination that doesn't owe me much.

 

In case you haven't noticed, I like one lens, one body...

Based on my experience with Olympus and Canon, I would not buy a long lens without IS in the lens or body, and find that with a standard or WA lens, I can shoot at 1/10 or below using a 1st generation Olympus 5 axis IBIS and still get sharp results. The IBIS in a Pen-F is considerably more advanced than what I currently use. That said, it does not help with freezing moving subjects and is of more limited value if you usually shoot in good light.

 

Between those 2 specific cameras & lenses, the Olympus would have a wider shooting envelope because of the faster lens (offsetting the smaller sensor) and excellent IBIS system. As described above, I would expect the Fuji set up to be less expensive and of course you could choose a faster lens. At the end of the day, if you really like Fuji, I would get the Fuji.

I liked the Pen F but after looking at the Fuji I would go for the Fuji personally and get the 23mm f/2 lens instead of the 27mm f/2.8. The primary reason is that the 23mm has aperture ring that goes well with the shutter speed dial on the XE-3. Larger sensor also is a better thing. I understand your desire for the 27mm because it's small but I don't think the XE-3 with the 27mm is pocketable. Besides the Fuji is less expensive in total but the lens is more expensive which makes me think its quality is better than the Panasonic lens.

I mulled over the X-E3 recently and decided against it--promo pricing, a $50 off Fujifilm.ca coupon, and four Fujicrons notwithstanding. Just too tiny for me. The extra metal grip didn't help much. Didn't dig the touch screen and joy stick--just too fiddly relative to my X-100T and X-T1 bodies. Personally, the 27mm seems the lens for that body if pocketability is your goal. The Fujicrons--with the exception of the 16/2.8--add surprisingly to the size of this tiny camera and result in a not-so-compact kit. The X-E3 is also a bit plasticky despite metal top/bottom plates and lacks the overall solidity of "Made in Japan" Fuji X bodies. Decided to wait till a demo/open box/mint used X-Pro 2 body surfaces.

 

If you want compact, 24mp and IBIS, have a look at the Ricoh GR III.

Just between the camera bodies I think it’s a tough call. The Fuji is newer tech and a larger sensor but the Pen-F has the X factor. But considering that the Olympus and the 20 mm together are the same price as the Fuji with the 18-55 lens and the 23 or 27, the Fuji kit is a better choice than the Olympus kit. Don’t write the 18-55 lens of as just a kit lens - it’s a lot better than other companies’ 18-55 lenses. The image and build quality puts it in line with, say, that Nikon 16-85 DX lens everybody used to buy as an upgrade.

I suppose I'd go Olympus. (I have no clue about the Pen F hands, on or anything Olympus' menu. I do own X-E1 & consumer zooms.) As always with such decissions: Make yourself somewhat familiar with both cameras' menu layouts, hit a mall or store with petting area and try to get a feeling of both candidates.

DxO rate the Panasonic lens somewhat 13-14PMP, depending on the version you get, so that should be no reason to worry about.

 

I firmly recommend getting IBIS or IS glass. I am shooting Pentax crop bodies (with SR) and believe it helps a lot. I am also shooting Leica without anything stabilized and fear that makes me run out of light / into "high end Lomography" way too frequently. 18 Mp stand ready to reveal that handholding 1/250 sec behind a 90mm requires a damn lucky day. Skyrocketing ISO is of course an option but an impressive figure doesn't mean much in the real world. - I 'd really love to have stabilization, to keep noise low or get a bit of DOF. If you have anything camera right now: Do a handholding test at 40mm FOV and see what the stabilization you might have is good for.

 

Your lens choices equal 40/3.5 and 40/4 (Fuji). Both looking like sane everyday choices to me, but none of them seems able to provide subject isolation against a bokehlicious background. On the Fuji combo I'd miss a chance to shoot indoors, in a pinch.

 

How does that camera to acquire blend into the picture of your bigger (but still modest!) bag in the future? With Fuji I do indeed recommend getting their 18-55 (or heck "anything") zoom for semi ambitious still casual photography. Those zooms have OIS and even the 16-50 generates bearable 4K stills. I didn't feel burdened with a pair of bodies and plastic zooms. - I see little value in fast unstabilized primes for general photography, that would benefit from DOF. Get them only if blurring your background and almost everything are your goal. To me the Fuji 56mm seems sluggishly focusing (on X-Pro2) and I understand my 50-230mm will be vexingly slow at the long end, no matter what I'll end mounting behind it.

 

Olympus' MFT stuff has maybe more appeal? - I see folks switching to it, because it offers beautiful toys that do what is needed for a teacher type's "proof of concept photography", personal touristy fun and such, without the bulk of a FF (SLR) kit. I suppose I'd want to end with at least 2 bodies, 4 primes or for starters, an additional portrait lens in a pants pocket.

 

I'm not (yet) saving up, to buy Olympus. I might buy something like an X-T3 used, later. I understand what folks like about those cameras, but advantages don't look big enough, to lure me into starting another(!) system.

I think the creative features alone would make the Pen F a lot more interesting & fun to use. I have an XE1, takes great photos but kinda boring.

...18 Mp stand ready to reveal that handholding 1/250 sec behind a 90mm requires a damn lucky day...

Don't take this the wrong way... but try drinking less coffee.

 

Or pixel peep a little less.

 

I know that ability to hand hold differs between individuals and I consider myself lucky, but you should be able to manage 90mm at 1/250th without too much trouble.

 

Here are two crops, first from a head & shoulders candid portrait:

 

ISO 10,000 1/125 sec

 

Second from an upper torso portrait (presenting at a lectern):

 

ISO 1,600 1/58 sec

 

Both were taken with an 85mm Jupiter-9, handheld, on a Fuji body.

 

Not the sharpest images in the world, but plenty good enough for printing at a respectable size. There might be a little shake obscuring fine detail, but nothing you'd notice normally.

 

 

I'm curious to see similar examples taken with the aid of IBIS.

Below is a link to a review of an Olympus 12-100mm attached to an EM-1 MkII, using combined IBIS and lens IS. The reviewer has hand held images with a shutter speed as slow as 5 seconds with impressive results. I don't achieve such performance using my EM-5, but it's IBIS system is at least 3 generations behind what is currently available.

 

Review: The Olympus Zuiko Digital ZD 12-100/4 Pro

I'd go Olympus with IBIS. The difference in the quality of output is small and a matter of horses for courses.

Olympus IBIS is very good. Combined with a small fixed lens it is very portable.

Fuji xe3 with 27mm 2.8 vs olympus pen f with Panasonic 20mm 1.7. I am after a small and light outfit to carry everywhere. A larger sensor vs ibis - which would you go for? I can't decide.

 

Joseph,

 

I would go with the Fuji E3. I have 2 Panasonic m4/3 cameras, but later got into the Fuji line. I have an XPro2 and love it. Then got a good deal on an Fuji E3 and really love how compact it is. I choose it over the m4/3 because I do believe the larger sensor helps the quality and the Fuji has performed great at higher ISOs for me.

 

Good luck.

 

Mark

@jaxphotocat

Correct me if I'm wrong but I think the Pen is a much smaller camera. Other than that, using both M 4/3 and Fuji, I prefer the fuji with the larger sensor.

The Pen F is wider and quite a bit heavier.

Thanks Sanford.

I sold a substantial amount of equipment and put it towards the purchase a new, complete Leica (digital) CL outfit a few weeks ago, with the 11-23, 55-135, 35mm f1.4 and 60mm f2.8 Macro. Very much in the Pen-style (but yes, way way more money) but the aps-c TL system is awfully good. Couldn’t be happier with the weight and size of the system, easily in my Think Tank Retrospective 20 sling bag.

CL system is beautiful, certainly too rich for me though.

The CL gear looks great but the lens selection is pretty slim. I think I’d rather be in the Fuji system, where you have a 35mm f/1.4 and a 56mm f/1.2.

The CL gear looks great but the lens selection is pretty slim. I think I’d rather be in the Fuji system, where you have a 35mm f/1.4 and a 56mm f/1.2.

Both the 23 1.4 and 2.0 are lovely and so is the 50 f.2. After getting the 23 f2 I was going to sell the 1.4 version, but I just like it too much:)

CL really has pretty well anything most people would want. They have a 35 f1.4 and a 23 f2, but no 56 f1.2. But for most of us a 60mm f2.8 would suffice. Nice and small.

I have used a PenF for about 5 years, found the stabilization excellent, but manual focussing most frustrating since the focus and metering point kept moving when supporting heavy lenses . (Pressing the unfortuantely placed focus-point-moving-control) Using superglue was not an alternative since one needs to acess the menu to set stabilization data. (I dislike autofocus since the exact point of focus is better chosen by myself than by the camera even when using lenses made for MFT .)

 

A strong plus point is that almost all kinds of optics will fit MFT and that the Metabones speedboosters deliver extra performance when needed. Even my normally useless old Canon auto lenses can be used and will have their aperture correctly set (fisheye 15mm and apo-lanthar 90mm).

 

The PenF focus problem made me decide to switch to a Nikon Z, this has a less pernicious focus- and metering point movement, but still it moves "on its own"; however in this case superglue will be able to solidify the offending control without ill effects-. Now I only wait for a simple Zmount to MFT adapter (even though the old 16mm cine lenses I have adapted to MFT only have an image circle suitable for half the frame, the pixel density makes enlargement viable.

 

p.