# For those who like to adapt old lenses



## nickzou (May 12, 2013)

And use a PEN camera, or just have extensive experience with it overall; how much of a factor is inbody IS when it comes to functionality, shooting, and ease of use? I've recently started to miss using a viewfinder with my GF2 and my options for an EVF with that camera are woefully limited.

I think my choices right now are being the OM-D or the X-E1. The X-E1's EVF sounds like a dream. But the OM-D has the inbody IS. I like the idea of the OM-D because that means I won't have to buy new adaptors but that's not that big of an issue as they are pretty cheap anyways. But I also like the idea of the APS-C format as my Jupiter-8 and my Jupiter-9 will be closer to their actual focal length.

Keep in mind, I haven't gone to the stores and tested either one yet but I will soon. So, to you guys, any thoughts on the IS issue? Any wisdom other general wisdom to impart on the issue of this purchase? Anyone have experience with both cameras (or either)? Anyone had the same dilemma?


----------



## Ron Evers (May 12, 2013)

I bought the first m4/3 camera (G1) with the only two native lenses.  They were just too slow for much of what I wanted to do so I bought a GF1 body for my wife & gave her the glass.  Up until last year I only used adapted lenses on my G1 when I bought an E-M5 & some faster native primes.  I had no issues using adapted lenses without any form of stabilization on the G1 as I come from SLRs without it.  

I would not ever buy another camera without a viewfinder.


----------



## usayit (May 12, 2013)

IBIS was one of the reasons I chose Olympus over Panasonic....  Even with non-OIS Panasonic lenses, the Olympus cameras can stabilize them while the Panny bodies cannot.  The VF2 is more than adequate for manual focus and the up coming VF4 bests it in the resolution department.  I enjoy adapting lenses to it but mostly for normal to mild telephotos.  

You are right though.... about the focal length vs crop size.  

But if you asked me which is more important for a camera that its main purpose is adapting of lenses, I'd say the crop over the iS.   I pre-date IS, I still shoot a primary camera without it.  I'm fine with shooting with out it.    But note... I have no experience with the Fuji with adapted lenses.


----------



## nickzou (May 13, 2013)

So I went to my local camera store and got to try both. I have to say, there's things to like about both. First, the stuff I didn't like. The kit lens on the EM-5 is horrible in every way, the camera felt much better when I mounted my Jupiter-8 on it (it also looked better ). The default set up of the shutter dial at the back is horrible. It's not so bad when you go into the menu and reverse it. But the fact that you have to stick your thumb so close to your eye and nose to get at that dial makes no sense. Other than that, the ergonomics are quite nice. On the X-E1 side of things, while the 2.36 dot EVF is certainly impressive it seems to have a rather low refresh rate and looks laggy and choppy (I heard that got fixed through a firmware update but I only got to play with a OOB version).

Stuff I liked. I liked pretty much everything else. Both cameras felt great in the hand but a slight edge goes to the X-E1. I think the X-E1's eye sensor is a bit faster but I don't think the EM-5's is particularly slow. Ergonomically, back dial notwithstanding, I think like the EM-5 better. I know a lot of you old timers probably prefer the X-E1's shutter dial on top and the Exposure comp in the corner but I'm too young to have experienced that era of design and function. I mess around with my shutter speed as my primary source of getting exposure. There's a certain depth of field I want and ISO is never easily accessible so that leaves the shutter speed to be as flexible as possible (to bounds of reason).

Overall, I think I would be happy with either camera. But as much as I desire the in-body IS (which was fantastic on the EM-5), I think really like the crop of the X-E1 more. Oh, another thing, both bodies are a pretty even 1k at my local camera store (for just the bodies). How come on eBay for a new X-E1 body it's around 725-770 where the OM-D is 825-870? Isn't the X-E1 newer as well?


----------



## Basil5278 (May 21, 2013)

Hi Nick,  Did you ever compare the X-E1 with the E-Pro1?  I haven't had hands on of the X-E1 yet, I have with the  E-Pro1 but although I liked just about everything else, it felt awkward to handle and that's put me back to the OMD as the preference.

If the X-E1 handled better than its big brother, I'd be moving back towards this - although the other advantage of the OMD is the tilting screen, as I prefer operating with a waist-level finder for portraits & group shots (ignoring the availabilty of lenses - I think the stock Fuji primes will be OK for me just now).


----------



## nickzou (May 22, 2013)

I tried both. But I'm more interested in the X-E1 because they fixed the dioptre issue and I don't care much for the optical viewfinder. The EVF is pretty great. I did find it awkward to handle but mainly because I think I'm too much of a newbie rube to understand how to shoot properly with their control layout. I know it mimmicks vintage cameras, but I like fiddling around with the shutter dial, that's how I adjust exposure primarily and having that knob on top is quite cumbersome. But that's probably just me being a child of the digital era of photography. 

The thing about the OM-D is that the back (shutter dial) is also really awkward. Maybe it is because I use my left eye but my thumb is always pressing against my nose when I'm turning it. Maybe it would be less of a problem if I used my right eye but I think my thumb would be rubbing up against my cheek.

This doesn't matter as much since you can easily reverse the dials so that the shutter is controlled by the front dial and since I'm primarily using legacy lenses, I'll probably just use the rings to adjust aperture. It would be cool if I could map the ISO to the back dial, that would make shooting wicked fast. I always thought the three primary elements of the exposure triangle should all get dedicated controls. But I don't think the OM-D allows for that.

In terms of size, I might have smaller hands than the average male, thus the OM-D did fit better in my hands but I think the X-E1 would be better for most everyone else. Especially on these boards (guys who love their D700 for its size and such). The form factor and the smoother EVF has me leaning OM-D again. Also Ron has made a good point about not switching systems.

If I could, I would like to try the LVF-1 for the GF1/2 to see how it actually fairs when manual focusing but they are so hard to find these days.


----------



## usayit (May 22, 2013)

nickzou said:


> If I could, I would like to try the LVF-1 for the GF1/2 to see how it actually fairs when manual focusing but they are so hard to find these days.



I personally did not like the VF-1 for the Panasonics at all.... its a much lower resolution to the olympus vf2 and OMD.  It also felt squinty.  IMO, the G bodies from panasonic are pretty good sans IS.


----------



## petrochemist (Mar 9, 2014)

I have both a G1 and a G5 and have found the viewfinders in them surprisingly good. Just recently I managed to bag myself a full spectrum GF2 and I have to admit the lack of a viewfinder has proved annoying on occasion. Whilst not as good as the other two I think the VF1 will still be a significant improvement for me.
My DSLRs both have IBIS and there have certainly been times when it's proved useful, but if it came to choice of IBIS or a viewfinder I think I'd find the viewfinder winning. The usefulness of a viewfinder has become particularly apparent today whilst trying to focus my adapted soft focus lens. This proved relatively easy last summer using the G1 but proved beyond me using the GF2 with sunshine on the rear screen.

Perhaps I'm biased but I think the Panasonic menus etc are better thought out than the Olympus ones (I really don't like the Canon & Nikon menus!). IMO the ergonomics are actually a more important part of a camera than they are usually given credit for. It's worth trading a few features that might be useful for the ability to find the features you've got before the subject disappears.


----------

