AmishHacker

My people would welcome him with open arms; we love technology too, just not the evil bits. Windmill electricity FTW

I have Adblock+ so I naively think you’re always honest.

I almost bought a DMC-L1 back in the day because it reminded me of a Leica a little. The X100 even more so…I might have to save up and get one as an around-town camera.

That’s a great lens and would definitely be on the list of what to get if I moved to m4/3. However, currently, I have an Oly E-3, 12-60mm and 50-200mm along with the 35mm macro and 2 manual focus lenses: a 50mm f1.4 and a 135mm f2.8. I find the 2 zooms can handle any situation I run into and saves me from having to switch lenses constantly. I usually either work at the short end or the long end (according to Exposure Plot) of my zooms and there just aren’t any good tele primes.

I’d disagree on the light part in so much as it affects image quality; whatever wizardry Olympus did with this camera is impressive enough to make most of the APS-C / m4/3rds argument irrelevant.

As a pure gadget lust and dedicated camera, I still want the X100. It’s the rangefinder-esque camera I’ve always wanted.

I’d agree, but how many people do you see wandering around with a 5D and just leave it in Automatic? I understand where David is coming from with all this…as a long time Oly 4/3rds user I would write it differently though. Maybe if somebody sent me a review unit….

^What he said.

Out of curiosity, why? Just the physical styling or is there another reason?

Thanks for chatting; I enjoy reading your reviews, and I appreciate you chatting amiably even though I was a jerk at the beginning.

The problem with M4/3 users is that they’ll scream that this is a pro body and you’re just not giving it a fair shake; that this is perfectly reasonable in terms of cost and you just “don’t get it”; like Palm users only worse. What you said though is the exact truth; this review is intended for when you have no clue about photography and want a good, small, DSLR.

And I guess that’s where the differences lie; this review is meant for a casual shooter who’s only going to buy a camera/lens combo and maybe a flash down the road. I don’t know many Nikon shooters that have more than 2 lenses that weren’t “kit” except for my 2 friends who shoot professionally.

I know a few guys who use Micro-Four Thirds for street photography and travel and they have the entire lens portfolio; however they’re in the enthusiast and professional market. I personally have bought and solid probably 10-15 lenses (if you count 35mm lenses with adapters) over the past 7 years that I’ve been shooting, but I’m a photography enthusiast so I have a different slant in what I look for in a review.

I just realized I sounded extremely pissy; sorry. I’ll drink some more coffee and try not to type like a jerk.

It was a good article and highlights it’s strengths but I don’t know if you covered the lens map very well. While it has a good selection of cheap zooms, all of the good lenses are primes which is what either draws people to this system or sends them screaming into the night. Personally, I love a good solid pro zoom, and the 12-50mm just isn’t what I’m looking for; way too slow at the long end for me to use it in low light, irregardless of the ISO capability.

If you go to dpreview, you can see some comparisons if you’d like. It actually holds up quite well considering the smaller sensor.

Instagram craze? Guys, do some research; they’ve had Art Filters on their camera’s since the E30.

I would love to do this…..me making money in IT though means it’s impossible.

Carry the dreams of this AmishHacker with you proud sir.