21
Jun
2013

X-M1 vs X-E1 vs X-PRO1 vs X20 vs X100S size comparison!

 photo fujifilm_logo_zps47ebf04d.jpg

[On June 25 Fujirumors will follow the announcement live. Follow us on facebook, twitter and subscribe the RSS feed, and you won’t miss anything!]

Maximilian was so kind to create a “quick and dirty size comparison” between the X-M1 and X-E1 and I’m glad to share it with you all. Thanks a lot!

 photo fuji1_zps3a9f3e7e.jpg

 

 photo fuji2_zps4fcf88f0.jpg

And also MJr made a comparison between the X-PRO1, X-E1, X20, X100S  and X-M1. Thanks a lot MJr!

Follow Me
  • http://trentontalbot.me/ Trent

    The picture is missing an X100 )

  • GBreyssem

    Curious to see what the X-M1 will be in real.
    To Trent: the X100s has no interchangeable lens…

  • Koks

    i’d love to see the comparison with x100 AND x10/x20, it doesn’t matter if they don’t have interchangeable lenses.

  • Rich

    This new Fuji’s size is right, we all hope it would solid as Olympus EP1/EP2, not hollowing light weight iike Olympus EPM1 or EPL1. Fuji XE1 is not as solid as I would like.

  • alan

    will fuji make an optional evf for this? tiltable screen + small body + evf would make my dream camera.

    • peter

      There is no connection port under the hot shoe => probably not.

  • c.d.embrey

    From the front the X100s and X-E1 are abouth the same size., but the X100s is thiker and heavier. http://camerasize.com/compare/#395,371

    • peter

      X100S is heavier because there is ton of glass inside of the body (lens is 50% inside of the body + viewfinder glass).

      • c.d.embrey

        @peter, Why are you so defensive?? I’m not critisinge your camera choice, just stating a fact.

        • MJr

          Dude. Without lens they’re exactly the same thickness, if anything, the X-E1 seems thicker. Same for the weight, like Peter says. Your comparison makes no sense. Just stating a fact.

          • c.d.embrey

            @Mjr, My original post was a responce to Koks’ post: _”… i’d love to see the comparison with x100 …”_

            So I sent him a link to camerasize.com showing a front view of a X100s and a X-E1.

            If you don’t like THEIR comparison (NOT MINE) maybe you, and @peter, should write them a complaint.

          • MJr

            No, i did mean YOUR comparison.
            “From the front the X100s and X-E1 are abouth the same size., but the X100s is thiker and heavier.”

          • MJr

            It’s not the image that’s flawed it’s your interpretation.

          • c.d.embrey

            @Mjr, http://camerasize.com/compare/#395,371 says 2% narrower and 1% shorter is about the same size. Do you dispute that??

            http://camerasize.com/compare/#395,371 says 41% thicker. Do you dispute that??

            http://camerasize.com/compare/#395,371 says the X100s weights 27% (95 grams) more. Do you dispute that??

            I didn’t interpret any hing, I just posted what they said. HAVE A NICE DAY!!

        • peter

          X100S isn’t my camera of choice, I’m just stating the fact myself.

  • SZRimaging

    Seems to me that, with the sizes of the lens, the X-M1 might be too small. The E-PM2 with m43 lenses are probably a better fit for the small body interchangeable lens camera.

    m43 for ILC and X100s to get an X-trans is my preferred route (just need an X100s).

    • peter

      X-M1 wtih 18mm f/2 and 27mm f/4 isn’t going to be any larger than E-PM2 with 14mm f/2.5 and 20mm f/1.7. It’s ok to prefer m4/3 but there is no size advantage provided you compare similar lens (e.g. same effective dof and fov, same amount of optical distortion and ca correction). E.g.:

      - 14mm f/2.5 ≈ 18mm f/2
      - 20mm f/1.7 ≈ 27mm f/2.8
      - 25mm f/1.4 ≈ 35mm f/1.4

      • SZRimaging

        Heh, you should see my charts I made recently with weight and volume. There is a difference (not significant, but it’s there).

        Basic idea, copied from a post:

        Kits are as follow:
        GH3 w/ 12-35mm Panny, 12mm Oly, 17mm Oly, 45mm Oly, and 75mm Oly + battery and Grip
        OM-D E-M5 w/ 12-50mm Oly, 12mm Oly, 17mm Oly, 45mm Oly, and 75mm Oly + battery and Grip
        EP5 w/ 14-42mm Oly, 12mm Oly, 17mm Oly, 45mm Oly, and 75mm Oly + battery and VF4
        X-E1 w/ 18-55mm, 35mm, 14mm, 60mm + battery and grip
        D71000 w/ Sigma 17-70mm, Sigma 20mm f1.8, Nikkor 35mm f1.8 DX, Sigma 50mm f1.4, Nikkor 85mm f1.8

        System Price (USD) Weight (in grams) Volume (in cubic inches)
        GH3 5472 1526 109.01
        OM-D E-M5 4243 1531 70.49
        EP5 3894 1160 57.93
        X-E1 3478 1267 73.325
        D7100 3843 2715 181.94

        With a couple of pancakes, I’m sure it’s fine, but go past that and the barrel diameter and camera width might make it too cramped to hold and use properly.

        • SZRimaging

          Stupid comments, it smashed it all together…..

          EP5:
          – Weight: 1160g
          – Volume: 57.93 cubic Inches

          X-E1:
          – Weight: 1267g
          – Volume: 73.325 cubic Inches

          • MJr

            APSC and 3:2 is worth it. :)

          • SZRimaging

            Mjr – That’s why I carry m43 + 120 film ;-)

            Honestly though, it is a tough call between m43 and Fuji X-Mount, two brilliant systems with equal trade-offs.

        • dtb

          Perhaps, but there is no comparison in image quality – the X-series cameras blow M4/3 away. The only problem at the moment is lack of a full lens selection. Once Fuji introduces the remaining lenses and perhaps a fast 100mm or 135mm, I don’t see why anyone would buy a M4/3 camera, unless they don’t care about image quality and dof control. Personally, I would love to use a larger X-Trans sensor camera ( APS-H or full frame), as the larger the sensor, the better, for the most part…

          • MJr

            “unless they don’t care about image quality and dof control.”

            Now that is just not true.

    • Wen

      Yes, MFT lenses are smaller, but still, they are not pocket-able, so it’s really an aesthetic difference instead of a functional one.

      • SZRImaging

        Sort-of. I often travel very light weight, and am beginning to backpack. Both situations the slightest size advantage still helps. For others, not a concern. For me, it is.

  • dp

    So, Fuji is working on a new camera (X-M1)……..how about they start focusing on the cameras they sell but don’t have in stock!!! (X100S)

    • MJr

      I doubt that the people who design them are the same as who will put them together. ;)

    • Tailwagger

      Maybe thats exactly what they’re doing… This makes the X100s old hat now. By introducing something newer that all the gotta have the latest stuff types will get in line and free up a few X100s for those who’ll actually use them :-)

      • MJr

        The fact that the 27mm pancake doesn’t have an aperture ring tells me they want to keep the x100s as interesting as possible !

        • Eric

          I wish I didn’t believe this, but I’m beginning to. How hard would it be for Fuji to make some 23mm f/2 x-mount lenses? They’re making the lenses for the x100s, after all. They just don’t want to compete with themselves. They should be more concerned with competing with other brands.

          • peter

            > How hard would it be for Fuji to make some 23mm f/2 x-mount lenses?

            Even if they would have made such a lens it would have been neither compact nor particularly fast. The main reason why X100 is so compact is that 50% of the lens is inside of the body. 23mm f/2 on X-E1/X-Pro1 wouldn’t be any different in size from 35mm f/1.4 due to the fact that they have to respect 18mm flange distance.

            That’s why they are making two similar lens with different goals: compact pancake and fast fully corrected lens for iq/dof junkies.

            All the reasoning like “they didn’t put aperture ring because it would canibalize x100s sales” is just hilarious. They’ve had it previously but the testing probably have shown that it’s too easy to knock the aperture dial when you focus or change focus while you change aperture.

  • Markus Worsdorfer

    Question: What’s the difference between a XF lens and a XC lens?

    • Don Pope

      XF = Extra Fine
      XC = Extra Crappy

      :)

      • Markus Worsdorfer

        lol. XF = xtra funny. Seriously, it can’t mean compact. It looks the same size as the XF 18-55. Anybody have an idea? XC16-50?

        • Jonavin

          XC lenses have no aperture rings?

          • peter

            Aperture ring information is encoded in extra R in the end. E.g. XF 35mm f/1.4 R has aperture ring but XF 27mm f/2.8 doesn’t.

    • Goose

      eXtra Cool, so beginners will be begging to get one.

  • Markus Worsdorfer

    Thanks a lot for above comparison. I don’t understand why so many people are complaining. All us X-system users should be happy about any addition to the system be that a compact body or the new Zeiss Touit lenses. It shows that theses companies see potential in it and will continue to update and grow it. Well done Fuji. Well done Zeiss. Keep up the good work. Btw, I totally love the size of the X-M1. I used to have a X10 and loved it. This is going to be the perfect replacement.

  • X-Pro 2

    So perhaps the X-Pro 2 will be the size of the X100s….

    • MJr

      Hope so. The X-Pro1 really is bigger than it needs to be, or should be.

      • deng

        Horses for courses.
        X-Pro1 size is ideal for my hands. X-E1 and X100 are a little too small.

        • dtb

          I agree – I bought the X-Pro 1 instead of the XE1 in part because of the size, but also for the OVF. I don’t understand the hype about smaller cameras, as the X100s would be as small as I would like. But, for less serious photographers, this camera would likely be a great choice – great image quality in a small easy to use camera.

          • MJr

            For the X-M1 hype is debatable, but the X-E1 is as big as it needs to be, no more and no less. For those who feel it’s difficult to grip then there’s a optional addon grip, which i may actually consider. The X-Pro1 just doesn’t feel proportionate. If i want something more to grip on to i’d rather get a D600, which is actually ergonomic rather than just unnecessarily large, without the payoff of fullframe.

          • MJr

            It’s not as dramatically large as i made it sound there, but i hate that it almost defeats the purpose of it being mirrorless in the first place. If they would just straighten the top by pushing it down and shave a little of the sides and thickness, it would make a big difference.

  • tikox

    Controls and look seems to be similar with X20… Indeed beautiful little camera. With pancake I would say that this is attractive ;)

    Now we are just waiting for Sigma to release their cheap DN lenses to X-mount ;)

  • TimoB

    Well, the X100s is the most sexiest of ‘em all! ;-)

  • Another Thought

    I wonder if this new camera will have the improved AF of the X100s, or be basically the same AF as the XE1/XPro1?

    They will sell a lot of these if they have the improved AF.

  • http://Flickr/ven210.com Ven210

    Im guessing that the x m1 will have focus peaking feature that will be implemented also with xp1 and xe1 via firmware update. A touch screen for the X m1 will make it a better camera. Make sense since it has little room for buttons and dials in the back. The x line is now cmplete. I cant wait for the next gen and the lenses also.

  • Johann

    Maybe their strategy is to release another XPro1 with full frame sensor. XE1 and successors would be a whole different line of products. Anyway, this is the only thing that’s keeping me away from somehow changing my XE1 agains this little thing. To be fair, I would miss the viewfinder and I cant’s see a real point that they changed the design of the top of the camera…

    • peter

      They will not release FF camera because it would require them to create a new lens lineup. This just isn’t going to happen even if you wish it really badly.