Ming Thein's Coolpix A and Fuji X 20 reviews

Discussion in 'Other Brands' started by Penfan2010, Apr 9, 2013.

  1. Penfan2010

    Penfan2010 All-Pro

    Jul 21, 2012
    NJ, USA
  2. Archiver

    Archiver Top Veteran

    Jul 11, 2010
    Melbourne, Australia
    Ming obviously thinks very highly of the OM-D. He says that the Nikon A image quality is 'stunningly good ... slightly better than the OM-D'. In my estimation, the image quality of a good aps-c DSLR or camera like the Ricoh GXR or X100 is notably better than the OM-D. So, for the Nikon A to be 'stunningly good', it should be a clear jump up from the OM-D.
  3. nippa

    nippa Top Veteran

    Aug 7, 2010
    Cheshire UK
    He also liked the jpegs from the X20 and rated the IQ from the Leica X2 better than that from the X1.
    For me his views don't reflect my own experience but it's a good read.
  4. Armanius

    Armanius Bring Jack back!

    Jan 11, 2011
    Houston, Texas
    I typically like and enjoy his reviews. But X20's JPGs are good? Eh ...
  5. entropic remnants

    entropic remnants Hall of Famer

    Mar 3, 2013
    John Griggs
    You have an E-M5 then? I had two D7000's and I agree with Ming. The two cameras you noted also have their quality issues and it really depends on a subjective view of "quality".
  6. Ray Sachs

    Ray Sachs Legend

    Sep 21, 2010
    Not too far from Philly
    you should be able to figure it out...
    I think I have a higher opinion of the OMD than some here too. I think its IQ is wonderful and with the right lens renders really nicely. I sold off a lot of lenses that duplicate stuff I'll always use other camera/systems for more, but the 45, 75, and 75-300 are definite keepers. And the 12 for street shooting because there's something about the flip screen and that snap focus ring that makes street shooting a huge pleasure. So its sort of marginalized in my bag at the moment - likely to take it out for specific situations but not usually as a general walk around camera. But that's not the quality of the sensor so much as the combination of shooting experience and I don't tend to prefer the 4:3 aspect ratio most of the time. For portrait shots and most telephoto work its fine because, for me at least, longer lens shots tend to be more about the subject and not as much about the composition and I can work just fine with 4:3. And for street shooting its fine too because I tend to crop a lot of stuff down to a square and 4:3 is marginally better than 3:2 for cropping to 1:1 anyway. But for middle to wide angle lenses, I just like composing and seeing with the 3:2 more than 4:3. So the OMD isn't my main rig, just a highly valued role player.

    But the only camera I've used recently that I think is notably better from and IQ and low light perspective is the RX1 - full frame has its charms and that lens is just wonderful. Other than that I'd say the OMD is very very close to any of the APS cameras I've shot with.

  7. entropic remnants

    entropic remnants Hall of Famer

    Mar 3, 2013
    John Griggs
    I'll tell you, Ray -- my time with the LX7 makes me wish more cameras had the aspect ratio as a dedicated switch/dial whatever. I love that. I also wish they hadn't crippled the multi-aspect feature of the GH2's sensor when they put it in the G5.

    One more feature I wish they all had: using the fold out touch screen to set the AF focus point position when using the EVF. I absolutely LOVE that feature of the G5.
  8. Lili

    Lili Hall of Famer

    Oct 17, 2010
    Dallas, TX
    Ray and Ming's reviews are very helpful..the salient point for me is the Ricoh UI....with far far better IQ.....sigh
    But I need to shoot more and buy less.....