Walking with my OM System OM-3 and my Fuji XT-5

 Last updated:- 16th November 2025

Corporate marketing values were very different when Olympus introduced its new flagship digital SLR to professionals and serious amateurs. Interestingly, it was the same year that Apple introduced the first iPhone. While using my Olympus E-410, I recall the excitement about the E-3 with its new high-performance options consisting of 5 fps, 1/8000th shutter speed, and the "world's fastest autofocus." I sold mine 3 years later in 2010 and was fortunate to find another one in 2025.

I converted and edited this EM-1 III with Lumix 35-100mm f2.8 raw file in Workspace.

Digital cameras like the Konica Minolta A2 and the Olympus E-3 formed the foundation of my digital photography skillset. I continue to use and value this basic skillset and the experience I gained with these and cameras like the E-M1 series. What made the "world's fastest AF" technology special is the E-3's ability to almost instantaneously focus and lock onto the subject. The 11 cross-type autofocus points improved the E-3's continuous AF performance while following a subject.

Olympus E-3 with the Zuiko 9-18mm f4-5.6 lens. I converted and edited the above 4 Enhanced Raw Files in Workspace.

It was a lovely sunny day in Switzerland and perfect for a walk in nature with my OM-3 and the XT-5. I was interested to see what the images of these 2 cameras would be like when I only use the camera and the RAW converters from OM System and Fuji. What makes Workspace and RAW Studio special is their ability to synchronize with the camera's image processor. What differentiates Workspace and Olympus (OM System) cameras from Fuji is the implementation of gamma controls. The tonal options of Workspace are more accurate, flexible, and effective than anything else I've tried.

OM-3 with the Zuiko 12-45mm f4 Pro lens (iEnhance Picture Mode). I converted the raw file in Workspace.

Fuji XT-5 with the 18-55mm f2.8-5.6 lens (Provia fim simulation). I converted the raw file in RAW Studio.

My current editing style consists of converting my raw files in Workspace or RAW Studio and editing the exported files with Affinity. I cancelled my Photoshop subscription and replaced it with Affinity. In fact, the latest version of Affinity is now free. While taking some time to familiarize myself with Affinity, I realized it's similar to Photoshop plus the tonal controls from Workspace. Manufacturers are better at converting raw files than any of the commercial alternatives. Better conversions mean better base-level data, not the included editing options of modern raw converters. Affinity has more editing features and flexibility than any of the commercially available RAW converters.

The focus is different with Olympus and OM System, meaning it's changing from "recovering" highlights and shadows to focusing on the natural balance between the highs, midtones, and shadows. It simply means tweaking the OM-3 or Workspace gamma curve to better mimic the original scene. The image will literally pop as you get closer to the right mix of exposure and tonal adjustments.

See this article for more...

OM System OM-3 with the 12-45mm Pro. This is a handheld 50MP high-resolution image. I converted the raw file in Workspace.

OM System OM-3 with the 12-45mm Pro lens. This is a cropped version of the above high.resolution image.

I almost never go beyond +4 or -4 when adjusting the different tonal values (sliders) in Workspace. My tonal adjustments normally vary between +2 and -2. That means the right mix between exposure compensation (a global setting), tonal curves, and highlight, midtone, and shadow adjustments. I also use the iEnhance picture mode and AUTO gradation option in some cases. For example, I used them for some of the images in this article. My default camera setting is the iEnhance Low option and no gradation. See my articles for more on reflected light, the 4th exposure variable, and the process I follow when photographing and converting or editing my raw files in Workspace or Affinity.

Fuji XT-5 with the 18-55mm f2.8-4 lens. This is a cropped version of the original XT-5 (40MP) raw file.

The OM System OM-3 and the Fuji XT-5 are excellent but very different mirrorless cameras. Both offer something unique with a strong resemblance to their professional counterparts. The X-T5 is special with its traditional dials and more hands-on operating style, while the OM-3 is unique with its ability to target and adjust specific colors. The general trend is global adjustments, whereas the OM-3 lets us create global color effects as well as specific color adjustments and profiles. What makes the OM-3 special is the link to the OM-1 series, powerful color and computational features, and the integration of the TruePic X image processor with Workspace and our personal computers.

Apart from being very different cameras, the application of the E-3, the OM-3, and the XT-5 changes with each camera's sensor sensitivity, resolution, image processing technologies, and computational features. The benefits of high-resolution sensors are application-specific and not a general necessity for image quality. For example, do you prefer more megapixels or more efficient image sensors? More megapixels simply means camera manufacturers are offsetting sensor sensitivity improvements. The practical implication is the +2EV sensitivity benefit for the OM-1/OM-3 image sensor and more pixels for the XT-5 with only marginal efficiency improvements over the older XT-4.

It's fair to say that it's almost impossible to do an unbiased comparison of these cameras when looking at the time and effort it takes to master the OM-3 and the XT-5. These are excellent cameras and top contenders for the trained and experienced photographer who also appreciates any technical, optical, and functional differences. You will notice that I am more comfortable with the OM-3, as it excels in creative color, managing tonal data, and painting with light applications. The Fuji XT-5 requires more post-processing for similar results. One could say the X-T5 is better at presets or film simulations, and the OM-3 is perfect for the creative and experienced photographer.

It's worth mentioning that these two cameras use high-sensitivity sensors. The ongoing social media conversation about dynamic range (DR) and noise is irrelevant because it's based on a commercially motivated "bigger is better" theory. I didn't find any "critical" DR or noise differences between these two cameras. The technical similarities between them are, however, fascinating. A new world of photography and editing is waiting for those stepping away from social media "advisors."

The XT-5 reminded me of the optical differences and characteristics of larger sensors. Being familiar with the deeper DOF of M43 cameras, I only noticed the reduced DOF while editing the XT-5 files. As you know, different sensor sizes change the sensor's image circle and the physical size of especially pro lenses. It also changes aspects like depth of field (DOF) and background blur. Technical variables like dynamic range (DR) and noise do not change with different sensor sizes. The design criteria and budget versus high-sensitivity sensors change the DR and noise of every image sensor.

These basics become more evident when we use the XT-5 and the OM-3. Anything other than portrait photos requires more care to create a deeper DOF with the XT-5. The experience needed to manage the technical aspects of these cameras applies to ALL cameras. Basic photography skills, editing, and creative know-how are general advantages, especially when using these two cameras.

OM-3 with the Zuiko 12-45mm f4 Pro lens (iEnhance Picture Mode). I converted the raw file in Workspace.

Fuji XT-5 with the 18-55mm f2.8-5.6 lens (Provia fim simulation). I converted the raw file in RAW Studio.

I've been experimenting with older cameras to improve my technical skills on digital cameras over the years. My current plan is to sell most of my cameras and to focus on Olympus and OM System. The most difficult one to let go is the Fuji XT-5. Cameras like Canon, Olympus, and Fuji are known for excellent image quality and flexibility when converting RAW files or editing JPEGs.

The OM-3 and the XT-5 are excellent examples of edit-friendly cameras. It's a joy to do photography with them and to process the RAW files in Workspace and RAW Studio. As mentioned elsewhere, my photography style focuses on natural light patterns and the basic concept of painting with light. It explains my preference for these two cameras with Workspace, RAW Studio, and Affinity.

The above composition shows the effect mindset has on our photography. The repetition of dynamic range, high ISO values, sensor size, and noise negatively impacts our photography. The alternative is learning how to work with reflected light, the gamma curve, and SNR. Workspace and RAW files let us manage color variances and rebalance the gamma curve, not correct exposure failures.

My goal with this article was to show what M43 photographers can expect from OM System, Olympus, and Fuji cameras when using Workspace and RAW Studio. The challenge modern photographers face is the camera's default gamma curve and marketing. The concept of color and tonal control, painting with light, and the camera's image processing moves us closer to brighter and happier photos.

Best

Siegfried

My OM System OM-3 photos.

My Fuji XT-5 photos.

My Olympus E-M1 III with two amazing lenses...

Last update: 23rd October 2025

Do you think it's worthwhile to become an expert in everyday disciplines like brewing a cup of coffee, cooking a healthy meal, or being an event or wedding photographer or a ranger at a South African wildlife reserve like the Kruger National Park? Although I may not be a professional photographer in 2025, I had the privilege to develop an excellent understanding of the digital imaging process. Are you comfortable with the technical and optical aspects of photography and digital cameras?

Some of the most basic elements of digital photography are the camera/lens combination, exposure, sensor saturation, and SNR. The camera's aperture and shutter speed values control the reflected light exposing the sensor, which is an exact copy of the subject or scene. This does not change with computational features like GND filters, Gradation options, or V-LOG profiles. We manage reflected light with the so-called 4th exposure variable, which includes a flash, diffuser, or time of day. Does this mean social media talking points like dynamic range or noise are not 100% accurate?

Olympus E-M10 IV with the M.Zuiko 45mm f1.8 lens. ISO3200, f6.3, 1/25. I converted the RAW file in Workspace (Low noise filter).

The Olympus E-M1 III and the M.Zuiko 7-14mm f2.8 Pro lens are some of the finest M43 products. The Olympus R&D team excelled in firmware options, offering more control over the technical limitations of the image sensor. The result is Olympus cameras with high-sensitivity sensors, M.Zuiko Pro lenses, advanced TruePic image processors, computational features, the Enhanced RAW Format, and post-processing options like Workspace. Olympus successfully leveraged the sum-of-parts concept, while competitors focused on more megapixels, larger image sensors, and the premise that physical size is a reliable measure for technical efficiency. These include typical technical aspects like image noise, dynamic range, sensor saturation, and SNR. (See the photo/electrons graph for more)

Is physical size really a reliable measure for technical efficiency?

The Micro Four Thirds (M43) format benefits from a wide selection of quality M43 lenses. Olympus and OM System M.Zuiko lenses are known for affordability and high-quality optics. An in-depth discussion of the design philosophy behind Olympus cameras, M.Zuiko lenses, and the M43 digital sensor format would take months. Meanwhile, some forum experts argue that Olympus produced inferior quality and released cameras with lower image quality in an attempt to rebound from a corporate scandal. This raises more questions about the reliability of opinions shared by social media experts.

See this article for more about the E-M5 III and the "corporate" scandal.

PS. The images in this article is best viewed on a large computor screen.

Figure 1

The above illustration depicts a typical challenge photographers are facing on a regular basis. Why did the shutter speed drop by 1 EV in aperture mode and a focal length of 56 mm, or why did the sensor receive only 0.5 EV more reflected light? The variable aperture of the 24-200mm lens changed by -0.5 EV, which caused less light to reach the sensor. The resulting shutter speed advantage was +0.5 EV, which improved the noise in the image to the right (study the histograms). Olympus cameras and the large selection of M43 lenses make it possible to select the right camera and lens combination for our photography needs. For instance, the Lumix 35-100 f2.8 IS lens would have improved the SNR and image quality by up to 2 stops from f2.8 to 4.5. See my articles for more information.

The M.Zuiko 7-14mm f2.8 Pro lens

The M.Zuiko 7-14mm f2.8 Pro lens is the only ultra-wide-angle M43 zoom lens with a constant f2.8 aperture. It delivers exceptional results and is surprisingly small for an f2.8 wide-angle zoom lens. For example, the deep FOV benefit of M43 cameras makes the 7-14 mm an exceptional lens at f2.8. We have no less than five excellent M43 wide-angle lenses with variable and fixed apertures. What makes the 7-14 mm Pro lens unique is its secondhand pricing. Why would one buy a used 7-14mm f2.8 Pro lens and not the newer 8-25mm f4 Pro lens? Price is one reason, but more importantly, it's about application and what you want from a particular lens. The M.Zuiko 7-14mm f2.8 Pro is one of the best low-light options. The images below were taken with the E-M1 III and the M.Zuiko 7-14mm f2.8 Pro lens. I converted the Enhanced RAW files with my preferred RAW converter, Workspace.

The M.Zuiko 12-200mm f3.5-6.3 lens

What if the comprehensive range of M43 lenses is one of several reasons why real M43 photographers hardly ever need more megapixels? The M.Zuiko 12-200mm f3.5-6.3 is an excellent multipurpose lens and one of several reasons for not having to crop. It's possible to correctly frame and capture almost any scene from 12 to 200 mm, or 400 mm with the 2x digital converter. In other words, some need to crop to 20MP, while M43 photographers capture correctly framed images at 12, 16, or 20MP.

Olympus E-M1 III with the M.Zuiko 75-300mm f4.8-6.7 lens. ISO800, f6.3, 1/1600 I converted the RAW file in Workspace.

A fascinating aspect of the size and handling benefits of M43 cameras is illustrated by the slight color changes between the two images in Fig. 1. The image on the left was cropped in Workspace, and the one to the right filled the frame at a focal length of 56 mm. The camera measured a wider view with brighter skies on the left and more dark areas in the image to the right. Accurate exposure and white balance readings and the TruePic image processor are the main reasons why Olympus is famous for its Kodak-like colors. Another crucial aspect is having more tonal data to work with when the histogram is moving to the right. The benefits of learning more about digital cameras are huge.

My grandson and I enjoyed a photowalk with his Panasonic G3 and Lumix 14-42 and 45-200 lenses, which I purchased for $120 in Dec 2024. Our goal was the late afternoon sun and painting with light while enjoying photography and the beautiful Bodensee village. We had so much fun experimenting with light and different creative ideas. The camaraderie of spotting and photographing those unique light paintings was priceless. We have so many new ideas for our next photowalk.

Olympus E-M1 III with the M.Zuiko 12-200mm lens.

The M.Zuiko 12-200mm f3.5-f6.3 is a smaller lens option for day-to-day photography. My wife prefers her 14-150 because the 12-200 weighs more and is a little bigger. I think the 14-150mm is a great lens but prefer the 12-200 option. The IQ combined with the physical size and zoom ratio of the 12-200 is unbeatable. I appreciate why photographers want lenses like the M.Zuiko 50-200mm f2.8 Pro. The 12-200 mm is an amazing alternative for those looking for a smaller but capable package.

These highly acclaimed M.Zuiko lenses offer a range of 7 to 200 mm, fit into my shoulder bag, and have all the benefits and characteristics of ultra-wide-angle and long-range lenses. Surprisingly, the 7-14 mm, f2.8 Pro is selling at lower used prices than the 12-200 mm f3.5-6.3 lens. Both these lenses offer a distinct 3D look. The DOF advantage of the M43 format further enhances the 3D look.

Canon EF 24-105mm versus the Olympus12-200mm lens.

See this article about the 12-200mm lens and wildlife photography.

The following images were taken with the Olympus E-M1 III and the 12-200mm lens. I converted the RAW files with PhotoLab 7 and use a similar workflow for PhotoLab as Workspace. I prefer PhotoLab 7 because the modern AI look reminds me of those surreal HDR images. That and the Olympus sum of parts strategy make spotting and capturing the right moment fun, knowing that it takes only small tweaks to highlight the painting with light effects in my RAW files and Workspace.

Why do I think social media advice on noise and dynamic range is generally inaccurate? The advice most photographers get is something like, "Smaller sensors have more noise and less dynamic range." Social media experts also claim higher ISOs cause more noise. The truth is, dynamic range and noise (sensor + shot noise) are a function of the camera's design criteria. Higher ISOs mean the sensor is underexposed and at a lower SNR. The social media version offers only one option, whereas the truth has various options to manage the SNR. That's why one image has more noise while both were taken at ISO3200 (Fig. 1). Dynamic range is similar but needs a more in-depth conversation. See my articles for more. Can we trust any advice coming from the social media information layer?

It's often better to buy a used Lumix 35-100mm f2.8 lens for the M43 camera you already own than to buy an expensive Sony camera. How many M43 photographers made the mistake of purchasing an older FF camera or an expensive Sony with a silly "kit" lens because quality FF lenses are simply too BIG in price, size, and weight? I tried several FF combinations and always returned to M43. Folks, the basic technical and optical truths illustrated in this article apply to all digital cameras.

Best

Siegfried