 |
| On the left Panasonic GX7 with 14-42mm Mk2 lens. On the right Fuji X-E1 with 18-55mm lens. |
Two modern versions of the "Look-a-Leica" style
Part 1
Historical background One of the most famous camera designs of the 20th Century was the Leica M series, dating from the M3 of 1954. Although these cameras were too expensive to be popular, they were used by some famous professional photographers. Leica M cameras with digital sensors are still made. They still have manual focus lenses and continue to use the classic optical view/rangefinder top left on the camera body (as viewed by the user).
The first mirrorless interchangeable lens camera [MILC] priced for the rest of us and fitted with an electronic viewfinder [EVF] was the Panasonic G1 of 2008. It was, and many of it's descendants are, styled like a little DSLR. But a MILC can be made almost any shape and the EVF can be located almost anywhere.
So now we have MILC's in both "rangefinder" style and "DSLR" style.
At the time of writing rangefinder style MILC models with built in EVF are available from Fuji (X-Pro1, X-E1/2) Panasonic (GX7) and Sony (NEX 6/7).
Cameras tested I recently had the opportunity to test the Panasonic GX7 and Fuji X-E1 side by side. This proved to be an interesting experience. These cameras have several similarities, notably the EVF top left and flat top body style. But each has a very different approach to the user interface.
User interface The X-E1 uses a variant of the traditional, mid 20th Century film camera interface using a lens aperture ring and camera top shutter speed dial.
The GX7 uses a Mode Dial and control dial interface. This system started appearing on digital cameras from about year 2000.
So we have the traditional vs the modern.
Target user group Professional photographers could use either of these cameras and come away with excellent results in the right circumstances. However my impression is that both are targeted at the enthusiast/expert/amateur user group. Neither has the performance needed for some types of photography, such as sport/action.
Kits tested The GX7 came with it's Lumix 14-42mm f3.5-5.6 (Mk2) OIS kit lens. The X-E1 had the Fuji 18-55mm f2.8-4.0 zoom, also with image stabiliser. I used the X-E1 fitted with accessory handle from Really Right Stuff and thumbrest from Thumbs Up.
As those two zooms are not a very good match for size or aperture I also included a Panasonic GH3 with 12-35mm f2.8 zoom which is closer in specification to the Fuji 18-55mm.
Dimensions and masses
| Unit | Dimensions Body only mm | Box Volume Body only cc | Mass Body + battery grams | Mass Body + battery+zoom lens +hood | Mass body + acc handle and thumb support +Lens | Mass Lens grams |
| X-E1 | 129x76x38 | 373 | 350 | 705 | 845 | 18-55mm 355 |
| GX7 | 123x71x55 | 480 | 402 | 535 | N/A | 14-42mm 110 |
| GH3 | 133x93x82 | 1014 | 550 | 910 | N/A | 12-35mm 305 |
Initial impressions
Feel The X-E1 has a solid, hard metallic feel, reminiscent of a 1980's 35mm film camera. Presumably this is intentional and part of the X-E1's retro appeal. The Panasonic cameras have a rubber or similar covering on the gripped parts which gives them a softer feel.
Size and mass The X-E1 feels larger than the GX7 because it is slightly wider and higher. But the GX7 has a more prominent handle which gives it more depth and total box volume. The X-E1 bare body is surprisingly lighter than the bare GX7 but that reverses when lens, handle and thumb support are added.
Comfort Although, or perhaps because, the GH3 is substantially larger than the other two cameras it is also the most comfortable to hold and operate with my adult male hands. The bare X-E1 felt as though it was about to fall unless I gripped it tightly. Holding the X-E1 was greatly improved with the accessory handle and thumb support.
System The M43 system provides a wider range of cameras and lenses than the Fuji X system. Until recently the Fuji X-Cams and lenses have been pitched at the upper/enthusiast market sector. The recent arrival of the X-A1, X-M1 and X-Q1 suggests that Fuji also wants a piece of the budget market.
Test method I made numerous photos of a variety of subjects with each camera and also photographed a test chart in controlled conditions, using RAW capture and Photoshop Camera Raw 8.3 (updated just days before the tests).
 |
| Both these photos are crops from a single frame. Top, Panasonic M43 with Lumix 12-35mm lens. Above Fuji X-E1 with 18-55mm lens. I used a GH3 for the M43 camera here. It makes pictures which appear identical to those of the GX7 to my eyes. |
Picture Quality You can read all about the different technologies and sensor sizes inside the cameras elsewhere. I just evaluate the output picture quality.
Low ISO settings Both on the test chart and with a variety of general photographic subjects I could not tell the difference between pictures made with each of the three body/lens kits. There were the expected minor variations in exposure and color balance but these were easily equalised in PsCR. Otherwise there was nothing in it. With subjects having normal brightness range, I saw no difference in resolution, highlight/shadow detail or overall picture appearance.
With subjects having high brightness range I was able to achieve good highlight and shadow detail with each of the cameras, using the sliders in PsCR, but there was noticeably less luminance noise in the lifted shadows of the X-E1 files than those from the GX7 which in turn had slightly less noisy shadows than the GH3.
The other thing I noted was that at very high magnification the X-E1 files showed sharpening artefacts around fine subject details such as small text or leaves. You would be hard pressed to notice this in the great majority of photographs. I saw virtually no sign of moiree artefacts or false color in any of the files from any of the cameras.
When Fuji introduced the X-Trans sensor (as found in the X-E1) they claimed it would have better resolution than a standard Bayer type sensor, on the grounds that the X-Trans sensor would not need the anti aliasing filter found on most Bayer sensors.
Well, on my tests the pictures do not support Fuji's claim.
High ISO settings One thing which Fuji does not claim for the X-Trans technology as far as I am aware is substantially lower noise at high ISO settings than other types of sensor. But that is in fact where the X-E1 is clearly superior.
With RAW capture the X-E1 at ISO 6400 delivers files with noise levels, color fidelity and shadow detail the same as the GX7 at ISO 2500, an advantage of about 1.3 stops. The GX7 actually performs very well at high ISO settings, even slightly better than the GH3. This ranks the X-E1 as really excellent in the high ISO range and equal to many full frame cameras.
So, the X-E1 has a larger sensor than the M43 cameras with lower pixel density so you would expect it to perform better at high ISO settings and it does, convincingly. All you have to do is persuade it to focus in the dim lighting conditions which might make high ISO settings necessary.
Performance To cut a long story short, the E-X1 is a bit slow, the GX7 is really fast. This speed differential applies to almost everything: shot to shot times, AF single, AF continuous, and all round responsiveness to user inputs. I should make it clear that in most conditions the X-E1 is not bad, it's just slower than the latest M43 cameras including the GX7 and GH3. The X-E1 was running without the latest firmware upgrade. I understand that the firmware upgrade improves performance and the X-E2 delivers further improvements particularly to autofocus.
The only performance issue which I rated a real problem in testing was the X-E1's slow, hesitant and often failed autofocus in low light levels. This made it difficult to utilise the X-E1's excellent high ISO picture quality.
I quite liked the manual focus system on the X-E1. You don't get FTM (full time manual focus simultaneous with autofocus) and focus assist zoom with MF is not automatic as with M43 cameras. But you can press and rotate the rear dial to zoom in at 3x or 10x. Having to do this manually gives a level of user control over the process which I found quite satisfying.
Ergonomics--Holding My regular camera is the GH3. By comparison, most cameras I have used including the X-E1 and GX7 present the user with a sub-optimal holding experience. Worst is the X-E1, which I found really quite difficult to hold securely. There are reasons for this:
* The X-Pro 1 lens axis is inset approximately 61mm from the left side of the camera. The X-E1 lens axis is inset 57mm. On the GX7 the distance is only 42mm and by way of comparison the Sony NEX 6 lens axis is inset just 40mm.
So what ? Well, the X-Pro1 has an optical viewfinder which needs to be kept away from the lens or that is mostly what you will see in the viewfinder. But the other cameras all have an EVF the position of which in relation to the lens is irrelevant. Panasonic and Sony moved the lens axis well over to the left, allowing room for a handle on the right side. But the Fuji designers did not move the lens axis across with the X-E1, so there is not enough room on the right side for a handle and the fingers which hold it. Instead we get a vestigial little blob which is of little assistance to the would be holder.
As a result there is a brisk trade in aftermarket handles. The one from RRS which was fitted to the tested X-E1 greatly improves holding and operating the camera, relocates the tripod socket to the lens axis and mates directly to several brands of tripod head.
Panasonic's designers didn't do much better with the GX7. They included the horizontal silver strip style signature running right across the top front of the body, just like Leica M and Fuji X cameras. But this compromises the handle and prevents the designers from using an anatomical shape.
* The E-X1 needs a control dial of some kind to operate many of the functions of a modern electronic camera. So a Rear Dial is provided. As correctly described by Digital Photography Review, this is ..."perfectly placed for operation by your right thumb". However most of the time when making photos you don't actually want to operate that dial. But it is located exactly where your thumb wants to rest. So Fuji X cam owners go get an accessory thumb support which keeps one's thumb off that dial most of the time and also improves grip stability. Fuji doesn't even make the aftermarket kit but they promote it's use.
Rear of camera arrangements on the GX7 are better but could be improved. The rear dial is well located but there is little support for the thumb. Already I read in user forums that owners are experimenting with thumb supports which slip into the hotshoe like those on the Fuji X cameras and reporting beneficial results.
Wouldn't it be wonderful if manufacturers got their products right before they left the factory ?
Viewing Each of the three cameras has an EVF for eye level viewing and a monitor for viewing with the camera held away from the eye. The E-X1 and GX7 have the EVF located top left. The GH3 EVF is located in the hump on the lens axis, SLR style.
When I began studying camera ergonomics I thought the top left, rangefinder style would be the best place for an EVF. But after using both types over the years I have decided it makes very little difference, at least for the right eye viewer. The left eye viewer might have a different experience. As is often the case with things ergonomic, I have found that detailed implementation of the viewing system does matter.
Eyecup Each camera has a very different looking eyecup but each works decently well. The X-E1 and GX7 without it's accessory eyecup both tend to admit more stray light in bright conditions than I found comfortable.
EVF quality The X-E1 has the nicest looking EVF with accurate colors and good highlight/shadow detail. It is not as adjustable as the Panasonics but doesn't really need to be. The only problem I encountered with X-E1 was a peculiar transient shimmy shake in the EVF preview image when I half pressed the shutter button. This was actually a bit disconcerting especially in low light.
The GX7 tilt up EVF As far as I am aware this is a first for the camera industry. It could be useful in several circumstances.
Monitor In my early days with digital cameras I only had access to models with fixed monitor, so I became accustomed to that, just as X-E1 users will adapt to their fixed monitor. But the GX7 swing up down monitor is more versatile and the GH3's fully articulated monitor even better, allowing the camera to be held high or low in either landscape or portrait orientation. It also allows other angles of view not possible with the other monitor styles. Last but not least the fully articulated monitor can be turned inward for protection when not in use.
Part 2 follows......................
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar