PDA

View Full Version : Olympus XA vs XA 2 image quality


papo
11-12-2016, 12:08
I know that the XA has a 2.8 aperture while the XA 2 is equipped with a 3.5 but is there a visible difference in image quality?

While we at it, my the zone focus lever of my XA2 is sluggish/hard to move - any advice? :D
Thanks!

jmilkins
11-12-2016, 12:43
Both great little camera with different lenses and functions/ levels of adjustment. i personally like the XA and XA4, but I have never owned an XA2.

It has been discussed a few times - try this thread (http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=4310)for a start.

Have fun shooting.

Michael I.
11-12-2016, 13:15
The lens is great, imho, so great I had two over the years (still have one, for sale actually), so great I bought a new one after not liking the ergo and control of the first one i sold cause i missed the lens and small package so much.

raid
11-12-2016, 14:23
I have had XA, XA2, XA4. I sold off the XA2 and XA4.

papo
11-12-2016, 14:25
I have had XA, XA2, XA4. I sold off the XA2 and XA4.

XA4 is also something i have been looking into because of its 28mm lens. why did you sell it?

raid
11-13-2016, 04:53
I did not not know better then. I may have bought it for $25 and then sold it for $50 or so. Such cameras were cheap then.

Mablo
11-13-2016, 05:50
I previously had a XA but currently own and use a XA2. Both are very good for pocket camera use. The main thing I like about XA2 it's much faster to operate. Out of pocket, open up the shell and it's ready to shoot. The default focus selection is what you'd use in most cases. Personally, I can't see any difference in IQ.

raid
11-13-2016, 06:21
I used to use the XA with B&W film in one pocket and a Minox GT with color film (in the other pocket). The results were excellent. Both cameras are tiny and light, and both have excellent lenses.

xayraa33
11-13-2016, 06:36
I like all the lenses on the XA series, warts and all.

The whole package is important in one very unobtrusive super compact 35mm full frame camera.

I have 2 XA cameras and had a number of XA 1s, most of which I gave away to friends and family.

Don't overlook the low priced XA 1, it is a robust simple camera that does not rely on batteries, very fool proof pocket camera with a great Zuiko lens for general use, even indoors with available light.

ChrisPlatt
11-13-2016, 06:52
I owned Olympus XA and XA2 cameras since new. After having the XA CLA'ed a few years ago
I had grown tired of the hard-to-see RF patch and the general fiddlyness of the XA and sold it.

My results are comparable using the faster-to-use XA2. A couple years ago I also added an XA3,
which is basically the same as the XA2 with the addition of DX coding for film speed (overrideable).

Chris

David Hughes
11-13-2016, 09:32
Hi,

I've had both for decades and the XA1, XA3 and XA4.

I ought to unload some of them but can't decide what to keep and vice versa. That's not much help is it? But they all have their strengths and weaknesses and decent lenses.

XA for accurate focus and "A" mode and backlight (+1) switch; XA1 for simplicity and fun as it is totally uncontrollable* except you can switch between 100 ASA and 400 ASA** to control exposure; XA2 fast to use and easy to find dirt cheap, XA3 as XA2 but DX and backlight switch and XA4 (zone focus again) for macro and that cute measuring lanyard, plus DX and backlight switch.

Regards, David

* Fixed focus I think, but not a problem.

**And it only takes 100 OR 400ASA film.

julio1fer
11-17-2016, 17:28
I have used both. If pressed I prefer the XA2; simpler and easier, and maybe the lens is better all around.

David Hughes
11-18-2016, 01:09
Hi,

The real problem is how do you compare them?

The XA1, 2, 3 and 4 have program mode on all the time and there's no way you'll know the aperture in use, unlike the XA which is aperture priority.

Mentioned because the XA wide open might look worse than an other at (say) f/5.6 and then there's camera shake caused by the shutter speed, perhaps...

My experience of them all is that they all work.

But I never/seldom print bigger than 5" x 7" and that brings another factor into it and if we post shots here they are often smaller than 4" x 6" and so on and so forth.

Regards, David