I’m new to photography and really drawn to small, retro rangefinder-style cameras (ideally black/silver). I want something for travel, landscapes, toddler/kids/family photos, and the option to use telephoto lenses (> 100 mm-300mm) later (I love optical zooming on my phone). Budget-wise I’d like to stay well below ~$1500 including lenses for the beginning.
After researching, I leaned towards Micro Four Thirds. My shortlist was OM-5 (I/II), GX9, and maybe the PEN E-P7 (though specs seem limited). A friend recently showed me a Fujifilm X-M5 (no EVF, but nice form factor) and an X-E5, and I have to admit I really liked the Fuji look and shooting experience (trying not to get sucked into the hype because of social media though).
A few questions:
- I want to keep costs low at first and see if I really stick with photography – which system makes more sense?
- How important is IBIS for a beginner shooting mostly in daylight, especially if lenses have stabilization? (X-M5 doesn’t have IBIS)
- Are equivalent lenses noticeably more expensive on Fuji compared to MFT for someone starting out?
- How would you describe image quality differences between MFT and APS-C in real use?
- Anyone here who has used both Fuji and OM System/Panasonic?
- I’m coming from a smartphone, but I feel like I might miss having an EVF – is that a real concern?
In Europe I can currently get an OM-5 II with the 12-45mm f/4 PRO for about $1080 new, which seems like a great deal. The GX9 is much cheaper, but people on this subreddit say the OM-5 is the better camera overall because of the AF and weather sealing.
Would you go OM-5, GX9, or Fuji in my situation in my situation? Is the OM-5 overkill for my use case atm?
And how capable is the OM-5 compared to an XE5 in general in your opinion?
Thanks a lot!