My Top 10 (+1) Reasons for Choosing the Olympus E-M1 Camera over the Fujifilm's X-T1

Pt. Arena Lighthouse, California (click to enlarge)
Olympus E-M5, Panasonic 35-100mm f/2.8 lens @ 66mm; 1/320 sec. @ f/8; ISO 200

As photographers, we have a multitude of choices among terrific photographic systems.  We can choose anything from large format film cameras to miniature point-and-shoot digital ones and everything in between. While we probably would like to own several cameras or camera systems, most of us can't.  Which to choose?  Which is best?  It depends upon our needs, of course.

First, I want it clearly understood that both the Olympus E-M1 M4/3 system and the Fujifilm X-T1 APS-C system are excellent photographic tools.  I just had to choose one over the other and this post outlines why I made my choice as I did.  You may choose differently and that is okay.

I own two photographic systems.  I have a 35mm film-sized sensor (commonly called "full frame") Nikon D800E with a variety of excellent Nikon lenses as well as Olympus OM-D cameras and lenses.  I now find I use the M4/3 camera system almost all the time, leaving the Nikon gear at home in the bag, for the most part.

Within the pasts 24 months, I have purchased 2 Olympus OM-D cameras, 1 Panasonic M4/3 camera as well as a Fujifilm X-T1. I purchased both systems with several lenses.  I was intrigued by both systems and wanted to find which served me better.  Both are excellent systems, which will exceed most photographers' needs, but I knew I would have to choose one over the other.  Which one?  In the end, I kept the Olympus cameras and lenses and sold the Panasonic and X-T1 and lenses.  Why?  Here are the top 10 reasons I chose the Olympus OM-D cameras over the Fujifilm X cameras in no particular order.

1)  The Olympus E-M1 and the Fujifilm X-T1 are essentially the same size but the lenses for M4/3 format are smaller than for APS-C format.  Additionally, they weigh less while still maintaining a very high quality in every respect. Smaller doesn't mean inferior by any means.  Over the past few years, my aim has been to go smaller, lighter, and less expensive. (I've been photographing for 45 years and have lugged large format, medium format and 35mm film and digital cameras around the country during this time and now desire smaller and lighter but, at the same time, keeping the same high quality.) Larger sensors require larger image circles, resulting in larger and heavier lenses.  M4/3 format lenses can be smaller but of equal high quality, thus serving my primary purpose for adopting a smaller format camera system.  This is a factor of physics.

2)  The M4/3 system, being more mature than the Fujifilm X-Trans system, has a much better selection of extremely high quality lenses.  Fujifilm and other independent lens makers will eventually get there, but aren't there yet.  B and H has 91 lenses listed in M4/3 mount.  Subtract out about 20 for just being silver instead of black and you still have a tremendous number of lenses available.

All mirrorless cameras, due to their very short flange to sensor plane distance, provides us with the ability to use almost any legacy lens or lens from another system by using an appropriate adapter.  The penalty, however, is that one almost always loses most of the automated functionality as well as autofocus.  I look at that as unacceptable.  We shouldn't have to make that big a compromise to get more versatility or to use a certain prime or zoom lens.  But, that is the way it is.  That being said, Olympus 4/3 format lenses are entirely compatible with the M4/3 cameras using one of the Olympus adapters (MMF-1, 2 or 3).  You don't lose the automated functionality or autofocus.  Yes, the autofocus is still a bit slower with native 4/3 lenses, but it is getting quicker with each new camera release.  It won't be long before there is no difference in focus speed as manufacturers are placing phase detect focusing sensors right on the camera's sensor among the photo cells.  So, if you then add in the Olympus 4/3 lenses that are available, you can add another 35 lenses. These are stellar lenses, for the most part.  With all these lenses available you can meet the highest demand for quality, versatility or range as well as keeping a tight budget if necessary and still realize wonderful images. There are lenses to fit any budget and will meet most every need.

3)  The in-body image stabilization (IBIS) in the E-M1 and E-M5 is, OMG, amazing!  I really don't want to ever do without it in the future.  I have made images as sharp as ever all the way down to 1/3 second on several occasions.  I could never do that before, even with my very expensive Nikon lenses equipped with VRII.  With the X-T1 there is image stabilization only built in to the zoom lenses, not any primes.  Guess what? Primes need it also, especially normal to telephoto primes.  Heck, even wide angle prime lenses can benefit as Canon has found out by including IS in their newest lenses.  This is a highly desirable feature you can't get anywhere else.  This one feature has been a game changer in the photographic industry.

4)  I was never really interested in touch screen focus until I tried it.  I am now a believer.  When mounted on a tripod, as much of my work is, touch screen allows me to instantly zero in on exactly where I want my focus point to be.  No using four-way controllers, pushing a variety of buttons, turning knobs, etc.  Touch where I need it to focus and instantly the camera focuses on that spot with no further effort from me.  I'm now a believer.

5)  Even better than just touch screen focus is the ability to focus and expose using a quick touch.  Wow! Again, when mounted on a tripod and using a 2-second shutter delay to counter any movement caused by touching the LCD, this is a great feature.  See my recent post here, for additional information on how I use this feature.

6)  I have come to love using an electronic viewfinder (EVF).  Both the E-M1 and X-T1 have wonderful EVFs. Best in class, so to speak. One of the main reasons I really like using EVFs is the ability to see a live histogram directly in the viewfinder. A live histogram gives me instant feedback as to my exposure, blown highlights or lost shadow detail.  This has its most value when working fast.  No need to take your eye away from the viewfinder or check exposure on the LCD. The histogram in the viewfinder of the E-M1 is superior to the one in the X-T1, in my opinion.

I use the histogram as well as the brightness of the image in the electronic viewfinder (EVF) to judge my exposure.  No need to "chimp" after making an exposure as I can fully see what my exposure will look like before I even press the shutter.  I'm hoping one day the major camera manufacturers can put some sort of 'heads up' display in digital SLRs' optical viewfinders so the histogram can be projected into those viewfinders.  That is how valuable it has become for me.  What will probably happen instead is that digital SLRs will morph to EVFs in over the next 10 years.

7)  I use auto bracketing quite frequently.  The X-T1 will only allow a maximum of 3 exposures up to 1 f/stop apart.  I need more than that for many of my images.  I probably could live with 3 exposures 2 stops apart, but the X-T1 won't allow me to do that.  Yes, there are ways to use exposure compensation to work around this limitation, but it is such a basic feature, that we shouldn't have to "work around" this limitation.  The OM-D cameras have a wide variety of settings that serve my purposes much better.  With the OM-D cameras, I can make up to 7 exposures and I will tell you that I have needed all 7 in some circumstances.

8)  The fastest shutter speed of the E-M1 is 1/8000th second.  The fastest with the X-T1 is 1/4000th second.  I have found myself needing 1/8000th second on sunny days when shooting wide open with my Panasonic 25mm f/1.4 lens.  I do wish both manufacturers would add a built-in ND filter setting as some do with point-and-shoot cameras.  If it can be done on an inexpensive point-and-shoot camera, why can't it be as inexpensively done on cameras such as these?  The answer is that it can.

9)  I find the OM-D cameras have a greater ability to customize buttons, settings and controls.  Too much it seems sometimes, but they are there if I need them.  Additionally, my needs differ than others' needs. Olympus was smart in putting in so much customization in order to satisfy the needs of most all photographers.  No one should be complaining that they can't customize the camera to better meet their needs.

10) Probably the most important reason I kept the Olympus cameras and sold the X-T1 has to do with converting the raw files.  I have a workflow I have developed over the past several years that works well for me.  I use Adobe Lightroom, Photoshop and several compatible plug-ins.  Adobe has not yet found how to extract all the "magic" that is in X-trans files.  I have tried and written about my experiences with raw conversions here, here, here, and here.  I just can't see the fine detail in green foliage that is there as well as some other non-foliage fine detail seems a bit smeared to me.  I don't know why this is but I'm thinking that there is noise reduction applied in-camera even to the raw files.  The detail seems smoothed over as would happen if you applied too much noise reduction to an image.  Maybe there is another reason, I just don't know.  At its worst, the fine detail looks like a watercolor painting–smooth and flowing instead of detailed and with high accutance.  I can't understand all those photographers out there that don't see this issue or just ignore it.  I can't and plenty of others that have contacted me either personally or through this blog see the same things, so it isn't just me.  To extract the detail, I would have to use another image editing software program and change the way I now work.  But even with other raw editors, there seems to be a compromise.  When the detail is extracted, there seems to be excessive noise.  These problems just shouldn't be in this day and age.  With the Olympus files, Adobe nailed it, in my opinion.  The color, detail, micro-contrast, subtleties, etc., are all there.  So, the #10 reason is the ability to continue to extract wonderful image files without having to change my workflow.

Here is a bonus #11 reason for going with M4/3 format cameras.  As good as M4/3 cameras, sensors, lenses, handling, etc. is right now, it is only going to get better and better in the future.  In my view, there is little need for a system with an APS-C or 35mm film sized sensor.  They will be bigger, heavier and probably more expensive with no almost practical gains in image quality.  Any differences in image quality (noise) that may occur using my E-M1 as opposed to an X-T1 can be neutralized by judiciously using some of the latest sophisticated noise reducing software.  In the future, that difference will also go away entirely.  I think sensors are so good now, that we no longer need large sensors to get first quality images.

I haven't mentioned the differences in color, contrast, saturation, micro-contrast, film simulations, special settings in the cameras, etc.  Why?  I think that with either camera and your image editing software, either camera can emulate the other in all those parameters.  I can make my Olympus image files look like Fuji's and I can make Fuji's look like Olympus'.  The software programs are so sophisticated nowadays, that almost any camera's image files can be manipulated to look like any others'.  So, to me, there is no real difference in the "look" between the two.  It is easy to create a preset to batch apply to your files to make them look like anything you want them to look like.

Okay, here is #12—second bonus.  Using my M4/3 system has rejuvenated my photography and me.  I'm having a blast using it!  I haven't had this much fun with my photography in years!  Using my Olympus camera is a pure joy.

So, considering all of the above, I sent the X-T1 and lenses back and kept the Olympus cameras and lenses. Again, I'm not saying in any way the Fujifilm cameras are not excellent image making machines but I felt, and of course this is just my opinion, that the Olympus cameras would serve my purposes better.  Feel free to disagree as opinions are not right or wrong, merely opinions.  Better than that, take the camera system of your choice and just go out and photograph to enjoy photography and have fun!

Thanks for looking.  Enjoy!

Dennis Mook

Many of my images can be found at www.dennismook.com.  Please pay it a visit.  I add new images regularly.  Thank you.


All content on this blog is © 2014 Dennis A. Mook.  All Rights Reserved.  Feel free to point to this blog from your website with full attribution.  Permission may be granted for commercial use.  Please contact Mr. Mook to discuss permission to reproduce the blog posts and/or image.