-------------------------------------------------- ----
1) decision per MFT system
In the photo section I drive parallel systems 3:
-Nikon With the D7100, Walimex Pro 14mm f / 2.8, Nikon 35mm, 50mm, 85mm (all with f / 1.8), 6 different zoom from 16 to 300mm, but are not particularly bright very inexpensive.
ME is not a system so inexpensive and versatile as the Nikon, but it's with the auxiliary handle and the flash SB600 quite heavy and bulky. If that does not matter to you, you are right with the Nikon system.
FUJI-X system
- X-Pro1 and X-T1-housing, XF Lenses 18mm f / 2.8, 35mm f / 1.4, 56mm f / 1.2, 18-55mm F / 2.8-4.0, 55-200mm f / 3.5-4.8, to Zeiss Touit 32mm f / 1.8 and 23mm f1.4 soon XF.
ME currently the best combination image quality + compactness, but quite expensive and complex operation.
The image quality, especially with the fixed focal length like 56mm, can amazingly compete with larger SLR (because of the smaller sensor) in every respect, so this system is sometimes also used professionally.
For a fully equipped but you have to shell out 5-7 thousand euros and for as much money you can of course expect professional quality and is also supplied.
The X-T1, and especially the X-Pro1 but are cameras that are due to the complex operation, constantly has to use when it is intended beherschen. And I do not for lack of time.
So if you are willing to spend a lot of money, almost always or often take pictures and put emphasis on compactness, then the Fuji-X system is the first choice.
MFT system (Lumix, Olympus - including those EM10)
- Lumix GH2, GH3, GX7, Olympus PL3, OMD EM10, to a series of fixed focal lengths of 12-60mm Zuiko, Leica and Sigma, all very bright (f / 1.4-2.8) and 4 telephoto to 300mm which, as with Nikon but are extremely inexpensive with moderate apertures.
But there are exceptions, especially the new Zuiko f / 2.8 12-40mm and the Leica 25mm f / 1.4, the highlights are correct, however, in accordance with cost 1,000 or 500 euros.
This system is in my opinion the bottom line the most attractive at all, because it offers an unprecedented range of housing and lens for all purposes, in a pocket camera like the PEN-Light or GX7 with pancake lenses to semi-pro / Pro Video Hollywood Quality 4K at a GH4 with Rig and follow focus etc.
Here one must not even be poor: Sigma lenses are available for 170 Euro, a Lumix 14-42mm for 160 euros etc .. These are not masterpieces of optical industry, but they are quite useful.
For these reasons, it is absolutely clear to me that an Olympus OMD belongs in a camera portfolio, simply because they currently have a top position in the price-performance ratio occupies the middle of the most optimal system MFT.
So summarized a prime strategic position.
In addition, can be screwed onto this inexpensive camera of superlatives with the speedy delivery of the Lumix GH4 in Germany, the lenses of the Olympus. So there is every investment in MFT system embedded in a very dynamic environment and therefore future proof.
There are other alternatives, such as Canon or Sony.
Canon comes for me due to the extremely short warranty and lack of goodwill out of the question.
When Sony Alpha 7 / 7r eg a "full frame" -Compact package with 36 MP for a mere 1,750 euros is a pretty tempting thing (I'm serious). But the lenses thereof are extremely rare and expensive. Because I want to wait and see rather.
-------------------------------------------------- ----
2) decision per OMD EM10
If you have settled on the MFT system and an Olympus, the decision has to be refined:
- EM1, EM5 or EM10
- Body or Kit
- If EM10, scharz or silver.
I have nothing against the EM5 but it is older than the EM10 and did not come into question for me. The EM10 has the same performance, better equipment is modern, compact and inexpensive.
When EM1 is a little more difficult, but actually quite simple:
1- the EM1 (not the EM10) splash and dust proof
2- the EM1 has a 5-axis stabilization (EM10 = 3-axis)
3- the EM1 has the phase focusing system (the EM10 not).
4- the EM1 is almost twice as expensive
5- the EM1 has more functions than buttons directly available
6- The EM1 may as a kit with the 12-40mm f / 2.8 PRO are delivered (the EM10 with the 14-42 f / 3.5-5.6)
7- The EM1 is only available in black (EM10 = black or silver).
Let's go in order:
to 1-
I do not see this as a KO criterion. If you really want to snap a long time in the pouring rain, for example, when observing nature, may like to fall back on an expensive OM1 or very inexpensive Pentax K30 with WR lens. In practice, it is mostly so that the lens would collect the most and the camera is exposed only for a few seconds. For extends an absorbent microfiber cloth.
to 2-
The 5-Axis is certainly a little better, but brings only max. a shutter advantage. This can easily be compensated by a fast lens like (incidentally waterproof) Zuiko 12-40mm with continuous 2.8 aperture. Although the lens will cost RD. But EUR 1,000 is half as expensive as my prime lenses from 12-45mm in the end and is at full aperture, undistorted Scharf. (And, somewhat "bent" at the largest angle, vertical lines on the edge of the image appear).
to 3-
The vaunted by advertising phase should focus only or primarily on Four Thirds lenses allegedly active. Otherwise the contrast-focus works in the EM1 as the EM10. There will be less than 1 person who photographed with Four Thirds unless he still has a good old stock of lenses.
But 75-95% of people who buy a EM10 MFT newcomers or career changers out of the Lumix range. You are going to buy Micro Four Thirds and Four Thirds lenses no sooner or later. So it forget!
to 4
The money I'd rather save and stuck in the PRO lens. This brings more image quality. The housing of the EM1 brings but against that of EM10 no better performance.
Addendum: In fact, in some reviews the sharpness with the kit lens of EM10 only as "good" judges. With the 12-40mm f / 2.8 the rating increases to "great".
But everyone knows that experienced photographer, the lens is more important (and most expensive) than the housing. So please do not save here!
to 5-
It may well be advantageous to program many functions of particular situations and to prove. However, this will usually only professionals and semi-professionals who want to work quickly and efficiently interested. 2 wheels ranging actually for 95% of shots.
Button and wheel-Fetichisten I can recommend the Fuji X-Pro1 warmly. There you can loose control over 1 dozen functions directly on the housing. However, one has forgotten everything after 1 week. This is something I call "permanent training".
Personally, I had no interest in a more complicated camera with a 600-page instruction manual, because I'm already well served in this respect with the two Fuji X Pro1 and T1. I therefore consider the EM10 as the better choice.
to 6-
It really is better to purchase the 12-40mm f / 2.8 (Kit of EM1) as the 14-42mm f / 3.5-5.6 (Kit of EM10). The cheap 14-42mm one way, "used" from kits for less than 200 Euro rebuy. I have 2 of them and am not impressed by the 14-42 special and would like to sell if I only get enough for it.
But there are traders who sell the 12-40mm f / 2.8 with the Body EM10 as a standalone solution together for 1,600 euros. I know that you have to lift, but this lens gets everything out of the EM10. Of course you can live with the faint 12-42mm well, but who wants to drive around with the cheapest golf when there is the GTi!
to 7-
Some buyers feel the black version as a valuable. I do not agree.
ME matches the silver version much better for retro look and sees no way out inexpensive.
I have both more retro cameras in black and in silver, and find all the beautiful silver and the similarity with the Nikkormat or F2 from the analog time is enormously better than the black versions.
-----------------------
CONCLUSION
For the above reasons, the EM10 is clearly the better choice for me.
I assume that for the EM1 which is aimed at a professional clientele, the calculation is not as scarce as the EM10, which is positioned as a popular model. Therefore, you get in the EM10 more camera for the money!
I hope that this review has supplied you with some arguments and has brought a little more light into the camera Jungle.
If so, please click on the button helpful, so I know that the effort was not in vain.
-----------------------
Supplement v. 03.06.2014
Reviews of OMD EM10 - usually with test images - can be found at dpreview.com, thephoblographer, com, trustedreviews.com, cnet.com, ralfs-foto-bude.de etc.
It is interesting that the image quality is assessed with the 14-42mm kit lens as a "good, not great." That changes when the is 12-40 f / 2.8 screwed to the Cam and confirmed my review and my recommendation prefer the cheaper EM10 but the money saved to get stuck in the expensive 12-40mm Lens PRO.
As MFT alternative I recommend the Lumix GX7 and took pictures of both cams set side by side. At which day the EM10 happened stocked with expensive 14-40mm (approx. 1,000) and therefore no longer appear compact. But the GX7 is really a good alternative and makes better videos.
The OMD EM10 with the 12-40mm is really a high quality solution for approx. 1,600 euros (currently best internet price).
Even better results, the combination Fujinon X-T1 with the XF 56mm f / 1.2 R (or XF 23mm f / 1.4 or Zeiss 32mm f / 1.8), but since you end up almost at 3,000 euros, twice as expensive as the EM10 + 12-40mm and has only one focal length.
Who wants to see the performance of the Fuji X can meaningful pictures on the website of Ken Rockwell look, sharpness, contrast, color, etc. are really impressive and at the latest then you realize that mirrorless cameras with smaller sensors no longer need to hide from premium DSLRs and can provide full professional quality for Publishers etc..
But beware: With some fixed focal lengths and the two zooms from 18-200mm is one already more than 6,000 euros and that as a regular customer with discounts or preferential rates. As Nobody at Media Markt, you pay for the fun correspondingly more.
In this respect, the EM10 is already a real bargain!
Then you might as well grab 5D Mark III for Sony Alpha 7R with 36 MP or Canon.
