Sony RX100 vs Sony A7 vs Olympus OM-D E-M1 - Updated 2014/01/13

Who comes up with these names?


Using the E-M1 is a joy. Great everything, super responsive. If you can deal with the smaller sensor and respectable performance at high ISO, just get it. So many external controls means less faffing around in menus. No, you won't get FF image quality, but the camera is such a pleasure to use and the quality is "good enough".

I want to like the RX100 very much. The  image quality is spectacular and I love the lens (35mm F2!) but focusing is a little unreliable. It occasionally hunts for accurate focus and gives enough focusing false positives to be annoying. I have it with the EVF and I do prefer it with it.

A7, improved over the RX100 but with an increase in size. Not as responsive as the E-M1 but pretty decent. The shutter! So loud!! Still a bit of focusing problems and am very curious if the A7r improves the focus speed. Also, what is up with the 35mm f2.8? The RX100 had a beautiful 35mm f2. Would love to try the Zeiss Touit lenses someday.

Why am I still messing around with m4/3 if I have full frame? I really like my m4/3 lenses. Voigtlander 25mm f0.95, 17.5mm f0.95, Panasonic 20mm, Olympus 17mm f1.8. Goes to show, the feeling of the camera matters a lot!

Update - 2014/01/13

Took the E-M1 on the road with me instead of the A7. Damn, I am glad I did that. Such a joy to use. Reliable, responsive, good image quality (though definitely lags behind the A7 in both resolution and ISO performance), well thought out ergonomics. The stabilizer works great, I managed a lot of good candid low-light shots thanks to it. ISO up to 3200 is fine for web and small print sizes. The dynamic range is better than previous generations of m4/3 as well. The Olympus 17mm 1.8 performed admirably as well.