Travel camera setup - Fuji X-E1 or Olympus OM-D10??

To start with, I already own the Fuji X-A1 and it did an admirable job on vacation with one...okay two big factors that bugged me. The least important of the two is the battery life and the little to no warning that your battery is going to die. That I figured out ahead of my trip and ordered a second battery. The biggie for me is the lack of a viewfinder. LCD screens in bright sunlight was a total pain in the rear. Any kind of viewfinder would have been nice. So, I'd like to upgrade my travel kit and I've narrowed it down to either the Fuji X-E1 w/18-55 f/2.8-4 or the Olympus OM-D10 w/14-42 f/3.5-5.6.
I've read the specs and basically understand that the Fuji has the edge in IQ, low light performance, and comes with a faster kit lens, while the Olympus is cheaper ($250) and has (based on reviews) a pretty snappy AF system, it does have a smaller sensor and slower kit lens. This setup isn't meant to be my main "go to" system as I have my 6D, 7D, and an array of lenses for serious stuff. This setup is for trips to Disney, niece's birthday parties, picnics in the park, etc...(in other words casual shooting). How much will I miss an APS-C sensor and superb IQ if I go for the less expensive route?
I'd love to hear from anyone who has experience with either of these two setups. Thanks in advance.

Be careful, I just purchased a Fuji xT1, my Canon equipment me be for sale soon!

The IQ with primes will surprise you. It's not quite APS-C, but there's little difference most of the time. I'd take the Olympus with primes over APS-C and zoom lenses any day of the week, and you could fit a bunch of primes in a very small bag with this thing. The primes also render the m4/3 DOF advantage kind of moot - because they're so small and most are f/1.8ish, you can get pretty good DOF with them. The Olympus ones aren't cheap but the ones I've used have been very good.

The EM10's viewfinder is decent. The camera handles very well as long as you don't need to go in to menus, which you may on occasion. It's also quite fun to shoot with. The controls that are present are not overcrammed on to the camera, and there's nothing to get confused and tied up with. The control layout is logical and pretty good, about the only real issue I have with it is a lack of dedicated ISO button, but the way I shoot I'd either have it set to 200 or just use auto ISO if it's dark enough that I might need higher.

The IBIS is pretty good. 3 stops is realistic, and you can get 4 if you're well braced.

Focusing is a strength and a weakness. Tap to focus works great, moving focus points around works great, and face/eye focus also works well. The camera is very good at focusing on still subjects most of the time, however, it is also poor at focusing on moving subject and tracking.

I can't speak for or against the Fuji, but the EM10 is very much worth considering as a lightweght travel camera. While it might not blow you away with amazing image quality, it makes up for it in ease/fun of shooting, convenience, and access to the necessary direct controls that is significantly better than some other compact mirrorless cameras I've used.

I think the best way I would put it is that it puts out very good images when handled in a very un-fussy way - and what more could you ask for in a travel camera? You can make great results and shooting with it is so easy.

Lellololes, thanks for the great response!
It was good to hear some real world experience with the Olympus. That being said, I'm shying away from individual primes (though I do love nice fast glass) in favor of a fairly capable zoom (like the 18-55 f/2.8-4).

I rented the em1 with 12-40 2.8, and it's a good lens, but it's not miniscule by any means. It's fairly compact and very well built, but it's huge compared to the primes - probably as big as a 12, 20, and 45 combined.

I'd recommend looking at the size of the body/lens combinations and decide whether you want to prioritize size vs quality. Nothing beats m43 for size, but going to the quality zoom lenses you will lose a lot of that advantage - advantage you gain back with primes.

I guess my hang-up is the impression that image quality isn't what it could/should be with 4/3 systems. I would love to see some images that dispel that idea.

dan.k78 wrote in post #17582344
I guess my hang-up is the impression that image quality isn't what it could/should be with 4/3 systems. I would love to see some images that dispel that idea.

It is just that, an impression, and it is something that is perpetuated by a forum like this. Most gear centric forums cultivate teh idea that if you are not using pro level FF cameras you will not get good results. For the longest time I thought that m4/3 would be a let down coming from some of the Canon stuff I have but that is not the case.

I have a E-m1 and E-m10 with a mix of lenses, from primes to zooms. I have been amazed by the quality that you can get out of the sensor and lenses. Sure there are instances where DSLRs are hard to beat but for everyday, vacation, travel, general use gear it is hard to beat the big punch out of small m4/3 package.

The difference between m4/3 and apsc is pretty negligible. There's just not much in it. The biggest difference is that a slow kit lens will have a very difficult time getting narrow dof, really. Kit lens quality isn't special or anything but there are prime lenses and the 2.8 zooms that will give you real dof control. My biggest gripe is the pricing - said 2.8 zooms cost more than f/4 Canon options for full frame.

I was considering jumping ship to Olympus recently and chose not to - primarily because of the cost, not the quality!

Em1 + 12-40/2.8 + 40-150 2.8 + 7-14 = just shy of $5k. The same, but with 12mm, 17mm, 25mm, 45mm, 75mm primes would have been about $3500.

6D + 17-40/4 + 24-105/4 + 70-200/4 = 3k, with faster equivalent lenses than the zooms. And given that I owned some of the kit already, keeping it was a lot cheaper than selling it and replacing it with more expensive gear.

So I bought a Pen epl5 with a 20 and 45 all used. My only mistake was getting a pen over the em10 - not much smaller and the em10 is a pleasure to shoot with.

If you'd like I can see about putting a handful of raw files up on Dropbox if you're interested. They ask have pretty much the same sensor.

I also noticed the somewhat pricey lenses for the 4/3 system (as well as the Fuji system). I'm not looking to replace my dSLR system or to even achieve super narrow DOF, just a lighter yet still fairly capable setup to "grab and go". A mirrorless system with a viewfinder, a capable kit lens (Fuji 18-55 f/2.8-4), and around $700-$800 would be awesome. I noticed that on B&H's site the X-E1 with the 18-55 is no longer offered. So I guess that takes that option away.

Maybe get RX100 III? It has a viewfinder. It has a nice, fast lens. It does great video, and it takes decent pictures. When you start getting into fast lenses, the set can get pretty big. Alternatively, you can get a SL1 or something like that...

Or maybe an LX100. It has a m4/3 sensor, fast lens, and does 4k.

In all honesty I think due to the size of the market, it's very difficult to compete with canikon on lens pricing. They do volume levels that are significantly higher than anyone else, so when you're not looking at specialty lenses they tend to be better deals. For example, the cheap Olympus 9-18mm is significantly more expensive than the 10-22mm, never mind the 10-18mm IS.

With their 4/3 SLRs they opted to make their pro lenses f2, which was great in theory, but in practice, a full frame system with f/4 lenses was lighter. Hell, I think 2.8 lenses were lighter.

So there's a really interesting compromise happening. Using a smaller sensor and no mirror allows small lenses to be tiny, but once you ramp up the aperture size to compensate, you lose your size advantage. The interesting thing is that with shorter focal lengths they can keep the lenses proportionally much smaller.

Have you used an em10 yet? It's a wonderful little camera to handle. Spend a few minutes with one and see is it speaks to you. Just be aware that Olympus's menu system is the biggest pile of crap ever and you'll be see set! I have a feeling that spending a few minutes with the camera will make your decision for you.

dan.k78 wrote in post #17582680
I also noticed the somewhat pricey lenses for the 4/3 system (as well as the Fuji system). I'm not looking to replace my dSLR system or to even achieve super narrow DOF, just a lighter yet still fairly capable setup to "grab and go". A mirrorless system with a viewfinder, a capable kit lens (Fuji 18-55 f/2.8-4), and around $700-$800 would be awesome. I noticed that on B&H's site the X-E1 with the 18-55 is no longer offered. So I guess that takes that option away.

The E-M10 is a steal at the moment. Get the 14-42 and 40-150 and you have a decent small, lightweight setup for the price you are looking at. You could always add the 25 0r 45mm 1.8 for cheap also.

One of these was taken with the XE1 and the other with the EM5, which is the same sensor as the EM10. Lens on the EM5 was the 12-50 and the Fuji was the 18-55.

Wow! Those both look great!
So I've kind of changed direction a little bit and am now waffling between the Fuji X-E1 and the Sony NEX 7. With the Fuji, I'd end up keeping my 16-50 to use on it and with the Sony I'd get the kit with their 18-55. On top of the two standard zooms a faster prime would be added later on. When it comes to cost, they'd both end up costing about the same. In terms of features, it appears to be a trade off between the supposedly superior IQ of the Fuji and the superior AF of the Sony. I know I'd be happy with either one, but I'm just looking for those 1 or 2 things that make me say, "Yep, that's the one". Unfortunately no store in my area carries these cameras for me to get a "hands on" feel for them.