![]() |
I think when the best haptics, engineering, features and performance of the Fujifilm X-T5 and the OMDS OM-1 are cobbled together, it would make just about perfect picture taking machine! |
In the past I’ve written that I thought my ideal camera is the Fujifilm X-T5. You can read that here. It still is my overall favorite digital camera but after using the OM-1 for a while, I've discovered it does some things better than the X-T5. I’ve now modified that view a little as I think there are aspects of the OM-1 that work better for me than how they are presented or engineered in the X-T5. Both are really good cameras but each has differences in how they are designed and engineered. This is my attempt to explain what the differences are and why I would like a camera that is a combination of the two.
Disclaimer: I’m not a video guy. I don’t care anything about video so none of my considerations address either cameras’ video capabilities. If video is important to you, you're on your own in finding how they compare.
This list represents only my preferences. I’m not saying what I prefer is right for anyone else and certainly isn’t the ‘right’ way to do things. These are only my preferences based upon my likes, the way my brain works, my past experience and the types of photography I practice.
First, here are the camera attributes I considered with which camera I think has better implementation. Below the list is a full explanation of why I chose each. I certainly didn't consider every little thing but things that stand out to me when I'm out photographing.
Body Size X
Body shape X
Camera Controls X
Customizability X
Custom Settings Banks X
Lens Controls X
Shutter Button Position X
Shutter Capabilities X
Electronic Viewfinder (EVF) X
EVF Display X
LCD X
LCD Display X
Sensor Size X
Sensor Type X
Number of Pixels X
Image Shape X
Color Science/film simulations X
Image Modification parameters X
Menus X
Autofocus System X
Autofocus Points X
In-Body-Image Stabilization (IBIS) X
Sequential Frame Rates X
Pre Shot/Pro Capture X
Auto Exposure Bracketing X
Focus Stacking X
Focus Bracketing X
Live ND X
Live View X
Subject Detection Settings X
Sensor Cleaning X
High Resolution Shot Mode X
Lenses X
Image Quality X X
The X-T5 is slightly smaller and lighter than the OM-1. At this stage of my photographic journey, smaller is better. As I age, I predict even smaller and fewer lenses than what I now use will be more desirable.
Body shape
I've written in the past that the body shape of the digital cameras which have a substantial grip is my preference. The OM-1 feels good in my hand. It just fits nicely. The X-T5, good but not as good. Yes, it has that old school shape that goes along with the old school controls, but that shape isn't quite as comfortable to use as the newer body styles. This especially holds true the longer and heavier lenses that one may mount on the camera.
Camera Controls
Customizability
Unless you have used an OM-1 and have either watched numerous instructional videos showing all of the menu items, bought someone's book about the camera or have studied the user manual extensively, you have no idea as to how many options the OM-1 gives you for not only customizing the dials, controls, etc., but also completely customizing the shooting experience. Almost every day I discover something new about the camera. The X-T5 doesn't come close. The OM engineers have thought about everything you may ever want to customize, it seems.
Although the X-T5 has seven custom banks of settings and the OM-1 only four, they are less useful than the C1-C4 custom banks of settings in the OM-1. The reason is the need to physically change the shutter speed, aperture, ISO dials and the AF/MF switch on the X-T5. The OM-1's shutter speed, aperture, ISO controls and AF functions are all electronic and lend themselves to a more robust custom bank settings. In other words, when setting custom settings, you can set many more parameters in the OM-1. An analogy would be the X-H2 versus the X-T5. Because of the electronic nature of the controls, you can set many more custom parameters in the X-H2 than the X-T5. This, of course, is the downside of having those old-school rotary dials that I love. Trade-offs.
Lens Controls
I much prefer the aperture ring on the lens rather than on a dial on the camera. This goes back to decades of shooting film and all of the lenses having aperture rings. I find it much easier to look down and see my aperture before I turn on the camera and much easier to change apertures since my left hand is already positioned around the aperture ring as it supports the camera/lens when shooting.
Shutter Button Position
Shutter Capabilities
Electronic Viewfinder (EVF)
EVF Display
LCD
I'm not a video guy. There is no reason I need to flip an LCD around so I can see myself in front of the camera. Also, when using an L-bracket, the fully articulated LCD screen of the OM-1 is rendered partially useless especially when the camera is situated on a tripod in a vertical position. The three-way tilting screen in the X-T5 is perfect. It tilts up, down, and on the left side, away from the camera. I I need to shoot horizontally high, I tilt the LCD down. If I need to shoot horizontally low, I tilt the LCD up. If I need to shoot a vertical way above my head, I can hold the camera up with my right hand and I can see the tilted screen just fine. It tilts down toward me. If I need to shoot a low vertical, I can hold the camera down with my right hand and the screen tilts up toward me for visibility. It works perfectly for me. Another reason I don't like the fully articulated screen is that it is off-axis when you are using it to carefully line up a composition. That doesn't work well with my brain. The 3-way tilting screen stays directly in line with the lens axis and I find using it to precisely compose much easier.
LCD Display
Sensor Size
Physics says the bigger the sensor the better or should I more accurately say the larger the pixels the better. Although the differences in the current generation of digital cameras is slight to none, I will always take bigger if I have the choice. The APS-C size sensor, on the surface, would seem a better choice. As I've written before, the sensors in these two cameras give me everything I want and need in my photographs and full frame won't make my photographs nor my photography experience any better.
Sensor Type
This may be heresy for fellow Fujifilm users, but I prefer a Bayer Array sensor. There are just too many workarounds that have to be done using the X-Trans sensor. I really don't see much of an advantage to it any longer (there might have been initially when dealing with moiré, but that was when sensors had much less resolution than now). I don't suspect Fujifilm will change as they have an entire line of cameras invested in the the X-Trans sensor system. As an aside, they did choose a Bayer sensor for their GFX medium format line. Hmmm. I wonder why?
Number of Pixels
Image Shape
I actually have come to prefer the 4:3 ratio over the 3:2 ratio of 35mm. That is especially true for vertical images. I think the 3:2 vertical image is 'too long.' It doesn't look right to me. I always crop mine to 4:3 or 4:5 ration. The 4:3 ratio is more pleasing to my eye.
Color Science/Film Simulations
Image Modification Parameters
Menus
Autofocus System
Autofocus Points
The OM-1 has 1053 AF cross-type AF points whereas the X-T5 has 425. I'll take more over less. Additionally, OM gives me 4 programmable custom focus point/patterns that I can make any square or rectangular size I desire. I can make them skinny and horizontal (think photographing snakes! lol), tall and thin or any combination of horizontal and vertical focus points that work for me. This is in addition to the small, medium, cross-type, large and full focus patterns that are pre-programmed.
In-Body-Image Stabilization (IBIS)
Although other companies are getting much better, I still believe the OM-1 has the best IBIS on the market, especially when used with lens IS that is fully integrated and coupled to the camera's IBIS—called Sync-IS. Disregarding other companies, I feel the OM-1 has better IBIS than does my X-T5. However, the XT5 is close. One other thing. The OM-1 gives me four different choices of types of IBIS from Auto to Horizontal Only to Vertical Only, etc. but the X-T5 only has off/on.
Sequential Frame Rates
The OM-1 has much more flexibility and options when it comes to shooting at high frame rates. No 1.29X cropping as in the X-T5 when wanting to shoot at very high speeds. I can shoot up to 50fps and have AF and exposure calculated between each shot.
Pre Shot/Pro Capture
Auto Exposure Bracketing
The X-T5 has more useful autoexposure bracketing controls whereas the OM-1 is limiting in my opinion. Much of the time, I want to bracket only from normal and overexposed (2 frames, 3 stops apart) or from normal and underexposed (2 frame, 3 stops apart). With the OM-1 I have to bracket underexposed/normal/overexposed only. Three frames minimum. Many times I don't need three frames.
Focus Stacking
Focus Bracketing
Live ND
The X-T5 doesn't offer an electronic, built-in neutral density type feature so the OM-1 is my selection here. I find it a very useful feature instead of having to carry multiple ND filters. Works well in my tests. Kind of amazing!
Live View
The OM-1 allows, in dark situations where longer shutter speeds are necessary, to watch the exposure go from black on the LCD, watch it brighten as light is gathered and then end it when the exposure is right. There is no need to keep taking test exposures for proper exposure. I can see on the LCD that the exposure is right. It is very cool to watch the LCD go from black to showing you a correctly exposed image. Nice.
Subject Detection Settings
The X-T5 give greater control over subject detection, lock-on and AF tracking settings. The OM-1 has minimal settings, -2/-1/0/+1,+2 (for stickiness on the subject), where the X-T5 has settings for Tracking Sensitivity, Speed Tracking Sensitivity and Zone Area Switching as well as five preset factory tested settings for various types of subjects and conditions. That said, I have found that the OM-1 gives me a slightly higher 'hit rate' when tracking birds. So there's that.
Sensor Cleaning
High Resolution Shot Mode/Pixel Shift
The OM-1 is the winner here. I have experimented extensively with the OM's 50mp handheld high resolution mode as well as the 80mp tripod mounted high resolution mode. The resulting images are excellent. Two things that people sometimes miss are that the high resolution images benefit from a multi-stop noise reduction (from the combining several images as happens also when you do it in Photoshop) as well as a bump in dynamic range. I find this feature a bit more versatile than we are led to believe by the reviewers. Even the JPEGs are excellent. Even better, the several individual exposures are combined in-camera! You don't have to use a separate piece of software to combine them as you do with the Fujifilm high resolution shot mode (Pixel Shift). Also, in my experiments with my X-T5, I found fatal flaws in the final images. A crosshatch type of artifact could be seen in all of my 160mp images. I believe the crosshatch pattern is created in the Fujifilm Pixel Shift Combiner software. I will add, it may have been fixed in later updates of that software than when I ran my tests. I haven't gone back to check. I guess I should.
Lenses
I want to include lenses as lenses are just important to a photographic system as are cameras. I think the Olympus/OM lenses are, as a general statement, better and provide a larger variety than the Fujifilm lenses. That doesn't include the Panasonic or all of the other third party lenses available. Over 300, by my recollection. I have never used an Olympus or OM lens that hasn't been pin sharp. They focus fast and accurately, are smaller, lighter weight, have faster apertures (for the most part) and provide excellent image quality. Also, Olympus/OM gives me a lens such as the 12-100mm f/4 PRO lens. That is the equivalent field of view of a 24-200mm full frame lens. It is excellent at all focal lengths, edge to edge, corner to corner and from wide open until f/11 where you can just start to see a tiny bit of softening from diffraction. It is the best all-around and travel lens I've ever used. That lens is pretty much 'glued' to the OM-1.
I'm not saying the Fujifilm lenses are not excellent, they are. My 16-55mm f/2.8 lens is my workhorse. My 150-600mm super telephoto zoom is first class. The 70-300mm f/4-5.6 is sharp as a tack. However, my 10-24mm f/4 lens is good but not as good as the Olympus 8-25mm f/4 PRO lens.
As for primes, you really can't beat the f/1.2 Olympus primes if you want to spend that kind of money for them. However, the newest Fujifilm primes are excellent.
All of this said, there still are questions as to how many of the Fujifilm lenses really can resolve all 40.2mp in the X-T5 and X-H2? Originally, according to UK Fujifilm Marketing Manager Andreas Georghiades, the Fujifilm lenses were designed to resolve a maximum 33mp. Newer lenses were designed with more pixels in mind for the future. Some of those original lenses have now been also recommended to be used on the 40.2mp cameras with the phrase, "...to get the maximum benefit...". That, to me, still doesn't say they can resolve 40.2mp. Just sayin'. There is no doubt the Olympus/Om lenses can resolve all 20.2mp.
Image Quality
Finally, I want to mention image quality. Even though the X-T5 has a larger sensor and more pixels, I find that in general everyday photography I can't tell any difference between the images I make with the two cameras. They both have excellent dynamic range and their noise profiles are quite similar. In my opinion for the kinds of photography I do, one doesn't reign over the other. It's a tie. If you micro4/3 doubters question that, you really need to rent an OM-1 and a lens and see for yourself. You will be amazed at how good the image quality is with this camera.
Wrap Up
I haven't considered all the differences/attributes but I count 34. I prefer 15 of them in the X-T5 and 20 in the OM-1, a pretty even split. But which of these attributes are more important than others? That depends upon what I am photographing and which camera will better serve that individual purpose.
In the end, for just going out and generally wandering with no specific photographic task in mind, I still prefer the haptics and controls of the X-T5. That camera just feels better in my hand. However, in the future, if I ever decide to scale down my photography, sell most of my kit, no longer go out specifically to photograph but just carry a camera, the OM-1 and the 12-100mm lens will be what I grab and go. That is strictly because of the lens. Amazing lens. Amazing combination. I wish Fujifilm would make a very high quality 16-135mm f/4 lens as that would be a perfect one lens to carry. Oh well.
Well, there you have it, a cobbling together the best attributes, as I see them, of both cameras for a better combination of haptics, features, controls, menus, camera systems and lenses. If I could create what I've written it would make the ideal camera for what I do. Your mileage may vary and you may have different priorities.
If you have questions or discover I’ve made an error, please let me know. Is there a camera or combination of cameras that you feel would make an ideal camera for you? Do you disagree with my choices? I'm sure many of us would like to hear from you.
Oh! Thanks for sticking with me through this very long post! I appreciate your interest.
ReplyDeleteHi Dennis, I found this column very interesting and helpful. I was an Olympus m4/3 user for 10 years until I wore the cameras out. I'm currently using a Fuji X-T5 and an aging, well used XPRO3 that I will need to replace soon. I've recently gotten interested in being able to photograph birds as part of a long term project documenting the reforestation of a local golf course. I'm currently using the Fuji 70-300 mm lens with the 1.4 teleconverter for the bird work. I'm wondering how you would compare that to the OM-1 with a similar OM lens for this kind of work?
Thanks for your comment and question. I don’t photograph birds as a main or frequent subject, but I do go out several times a year to photograph them with a couple of photographer friends of mine. Because I don’t photograph birds ‘most’ of the time in my photography, I decided I would not invest in one of the top camera and lens combinations as I can’t justify the high cost of a Sony A1, Canon R5 or Nikon Z8 with an associated lens. From my research I came to conclude that both the X-T5 and OM-1, although not the best, would adequately serve my purpose. Since I own both, I bought a Fujifilm 150-600mm lens and an Olympus 100-400mm lens so I could compare both systems then settle on one. That said, I’ve used both and both work pretty well for birds and birds-in-flight photography. Both systems give me a pretty high success rate, with both recognizing the birds in the frame immediately, locking on and giving me sharp photos. I will say, the Olympus 100-400 is the much smaller lens but the Fujifilm lens has a bit longer reach. Everything has trade-offs.
DeleteI have not yet come to a definitive conclusion as to which combination works better. From the several times I’ve used both, I’ve gotten a slightly higher ‘hit rate’ with the OM combination. In December and January I have two bird specific trips planned and that is when I should have adequate information as to which combination works better for me. I think both work well, but I plan to keep only one of the long lenses for the future but will keep both cameras.
Just as an aside, the Fujifilm X-H2S works much better for bird photography than does the X-T5 for a few reasons. It is faster, has higher frame rates, it has a better EVF, it’s EVF is blackout free and has the ability to program a larger number of settings as a ‘Custom’ settings, such as C1 or C2, etc. which allows me to instantly change all of those parameters. For example, I have C1 programmed for all of my preferred settings for birds not in flight, C2 for birds-in-flight and C3 for birds-in-flight with “Pre Shot” enabled. I can instantly move from one to another and change many settings accordingly. I hope this helps. ~Dennis
One other point. I also have the Fujifilm 70-300mm lens, a terrific lens, by the way, but I have not used it for bird photography. I will try it during these upcoming bird photography trips to find out how well it works as well. ~Dennis
DeleteHi Dennis, Thank you for such a thoughtful and thorough answer. One limiting factor for me is that I have severe rotator cuff injuries on both arms so weight is a major factor. I recently started using a monopod with Wimberley Monogimbal. This has been a big help, but I'm still in the testing phase, so we'll see. I look forward to anything else you might write on this and other topics.
DeleteThank you for the compliment. I very much appreciate it. Good luck with your rotator cuffs. Not fun at all. I hope you get some relief.
DeleteInteresting idea, always good to dream. OM-1 and 12-100. My go to lens for landscapes and days I just want to walk around and photograph anything that looks interesting
ReplyDeleteThanks for your thoughts. Mine, as well. My EDC combination for whenever I go out. ~Dennis
DeleteI have landed on the X-T5 and OM-1 as my two cameras. They are superb instruments and I think you have it about right as to the two cameras. Handling is often an individual thing and I prefer the Fuji shutter for its absolutely lovely touch. I also like the slimmer grip on the X-T5.
ReplyDeleteElliot, thank you for your comment. It is always good to hear from others who have direct knowledge. ~Dennis
DeleteGlad I found this page, I'm a Fuji user and shoot mostly landscapes and usually carry two bodies with Me the 18-55 and 70-300. There's lots to like from Fuji but I would love a single Camera lens setup that is top quality, so after lots of looking around I think I will give the OM-1 and 12-100 a go, they both look amazing. Thanks this article was very informative.
ReplyDeleteThank you. I'm happy I was able to help. ~Dennis
Delete