Should I replace Fuji X100 with Leica M8?

[TCY]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I have an opportunity to buy a used Leica M8 for very reasonable price for canadian $1487 (2300 plus shutter count). Currently I have a Fuji X100 which I like very much.

 

My question is should I replace the Fuji X100 witha used Leica M8? I have never use a rangefinder before.

 

Any advise?

 

Thank you.

[rudingshain]

i have done this and never looked back but. I had an M6 before an several lenses and I can live with the weak iso performance. I have an 8.2 and for me it is the best camera I have ever had.

 

think about some point´s . First

 

1. What is your why?

2. X100 is still a very good camera

3. if you want avery good lens for replacent you need a summicron 28 2.0 if it should be a leica lens

4. Do you want a leica because you want to have the rangefinder experince

 

My idea is

 

buy an M8 with a summicron c40 with a UV/IR Filter! (read for infromation) and keep the X100 also.

then you have all you need.

 

spiegellos

Edited July 26, 2013 by rudingshain

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[acordes]

Handling of x100 is awful, M8 is great.

Had a x100 sold it, bought a used m8.2 with some Voigtländer 35mm as starter kit and am really happy with it.

I was on manual focus anyway, so the x100 was hard on that side.

If you are not used to it, it may take some days, but you will see that you get used to it very soon, and then you can't think different.

 

Cheers Axel

[Lee Martin]

Considering what you will get for the X100 if you sold it, then you might as well keep it,or use the two side by side for a while . If the M8 is everything you expect it to be, and you like the way it operates then sell the Fuji. If you don't get along with the M8 you've got a camera you're not happy with and you've sold the one that you obviously like

[jaapv]

I have an opportunity to buy a used Leica M8 for very reasonable price for canadian $1487 (2300 plus shutter count). Currently I have a Fuji X100 which I like very much.

 

My question is should I replace the Fuji X100 witha used Leica M8? I have never use a rangefinder before.

 

Any advise?

 

Thank you.

If you want to do it you should, if you don't you shouldn't. Maybe a snide reply, but these are two quite different cameras. If you like fully featured ones, the Fuji is your thing, if you like minimalist cameras and the need for user input, get the M8. Only you can decide. Edited July 27, 2013 by jaapv

[earleygallery]

What do you know about the M8? Do you know about the need to use IR filters, are you comfortable shooting RAW and doing post processing, manual focussing etc.

 

If you use the X100 in point and shoot mode you might find the M8 too challenging.

 

I suggest reading up on here, use the search function and then decide if you like what you read. Maybe keep the X100 too, for a while at least.

[Frank Black]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

i Had both....

 

 

Bottom line is that the files of the M8 are much better then the ones from the Fuji...this is a personal opinion....

Just like them better....

 

The fuji is of course more flexible....the so trendy high iso,the hdr,etc etc...

The M8 is a camera i learned not to trust....in the end damaged sensor,shutter problem, you name it....

 

I sold them both and use a M6 and a Xa

 

And im happy

[bill]

So,

 

I didn't particularly get on with the X100 I had and my views on the M8 are well documented here, so I am the ideal person to advise

 

1. What do you like (and dislike) about the X100? If you can articulate that we have more to go on

 

2. Do you want to change focal lengths? If not, I would stay with the X100.

 

3. Rangefinder focussing is not the same as the X100 experience in any way and is not for everyone - you could be making an expensive mistake in changing

 

4. If you like the Fuji interface but want more flexibility you should go for an X-E1, which through it's own lens mount and range and adaptors opens up a world of focal lengths to you from many manufacturers

 

5. Research the M8 fully. Find out about its track record for reliability, its repairability and the quirks of its use such as the need to use UV/IR filters. Then ask yourself how much money you want to invest in "old tech".

 

Ultimately it is your choice; but "I wouldn't start from here if I were you".

 

Regards,

 

Bill

[TCY]

Thank you for all the advise.

 

I will research more on the M8 and decide.

 

Regards.

[pfhrased]

I made this exact decision as well, and rather than asking why you're considering it or what you like about the X100, I figure it's worth sharing what I encountered.

 

1) there is no such thing as high-iso or indoor low light performance with the M8, in comparison to the X100. Just not even close. I had issues over ISO 400, (which looks like ISO 1600 on the X100 in low light).

2) there is a big need for post-processing development sometimes, but this ends up becoming very very rewarding.

3) buy a tripod. At least, assuming you like landscape or want to take some night or low-light shots.

4) you may find you miss close-focusing, so probably better to lean towards .7m focus distance lenses than .9m - it felt really alien dealing with that.

5) overall it's a really rewarding experience, but/and it will force you to learn good habits with the camera.

 

There were three drivers for me.

- Wanting to buy into the Leica system, with a reasonably low cost entry point. M8.2 + third party lenses at first, then some older Leica lenses etc

- Manual focus. Nothing beats rangefinder manual focus. I was hesitant because they're not exactly easy to find to try out sometimes, but it was totally worth it.

- Other focal length options. I started out with a 21/28mm and 40/50mm. I then bought a 28/2.8 elmarit for a good 35mm equivalent and ditched the 21 - even now I see in 35mm thanks to the Fuji, so I reckon if you do sell the X100 look into a 28mm of some sort.

 

If you can afford to not sell the Fuji, keep it for party / dinner shots. The M8 will be terrible for that without very fast glass and a super steady hand if the lighting is poor. You'll have a fair degree of latitude with raw files though, so it can still work even when underexposed.

 

Hope that helps.

[NJH]

I agree with the above opinions on this comparison.

 

I own both cameras so a couple of additional points.

 

Weight. The M8 with any lens feels vastly heavier but conversely vastly better built and solid.

 

Viewfinder. I noticed the other night that the X100 has a horribly distorted optical viewfinder. I guess I got so used to the M8 I hadn't noticed this until I went back to the X100 again. I find it somewhat disorientating, whereas I can walk around all day with the M8 and never get such a feeling or eye strain.

 

HMI / MMI. Strangely I also found it difficult to get used to the display clutter again on the X100, the approach of the two companies in this area really can't be understated they are like two polar opposites. I don't think I ever really got fully comfortable with the X100 but was comfortable with the M8 after my first outing with it. It might sound crazy to say it but Canon DSLRs are probably closer to an M in use than the Fujis because of this approach Fuji have with giving the user a million and one ways of doing things, buttons and controls all over the place and display clutter.

 

Still though I am keeping the X100 for close up, fill flash in any light (leaf shutter syncs at all shutter speeds), ISO 3200 and because its lighter and more pocketable. Its only worth about the same as a slow Voigtlander lens so not much point in selling unless one badly wants to use 35mm on their M body only.

 

One last point. I bought the cheapest M8 body I could find because I wasn't sure if digital M was for me. I don't regret that decision at all.

[farnz]

<sigh> How quick people are to trash the M8 which was, and still is, a very good camera. Like every camera it has its strong points and its weak points but just because its technology has been superseded by newer cameras doesn't make the M8 a bad camera.

 

Stay with your Fuji X100 if clinically clean high ISO performance or artificial HDR pictures are what you desire but if you'd like a gateway into the legendary performance of the Leica M lenses with pinpoint accurate rangefinder focussing and are strong enough to handle a learning curve then the least expensive option is the M8. And its handling simplicity is pure joy.

 

Pete.

[NJH]

Honestly the only thing about my M8 that annoys me is the fairly frequent need to clean the sensor with a blower and or Artic Butterfly. Since Leica are not really into sensor shake reduction this is just something one has to accept with this system, either that or change lenses less but the whole point for me was 1) rangefinder experience, 2) M mount lens ecosystem.

 

Its not often said but Leica have a few technological advantages over Fuji, the firmware on the M8 for example includes 3 features Fuji fans used to plead for from Fuji like crazy but didn't deliver in their x mount cameras:

1) Proper Auto ISO in that you can select the minimum shutter speed.

2) Image review that allows one to zoom in on a part of the image then scan between a sequence of images looking at the same zoomed in section.

3) RGB histogram.

[NJH]

1) there is no such thing as high-iso or indoor low light performance with the M8, in comparison to the X100. Just not even close. I had issues over ISO 400, (which looks like ISO 1600 on the X100 in low light).

 

My experience also however there is a very big but. Try the 2 cameras side by side in Auto ISO and try and get the same shutter speed and aperture. I have some plain cream coloured walls in the house for trying this and noted the X100 would meter up to ISO 1600 whereas for the exact same exposure the M8 is at ISO 640. I posted about this before on here so the difference is really no more about 1/2 a stop or so at those intermediate ISOs.

 

Given that I can hand hold slow shutter speeds better with the M8 than the X100 I don't get any actual real world loss of capability except when its really dark and higher than ISO 800 would be needed on the M8. ISO 3200 on the X100 produces remarkably clean JPEGs but they have very little detail so its still not ideal. OTOH its the colour noise in the shadows that seems weak on the M8 so black and white seems much more usable at the higher ISOs.

 

Honestly if high ISO was really a priority I think I would just buy a Canon or Nikon full frame DSLR and be done with it, the 6D costs about the same as an M8 anyway.

[AncientCityPhoto]

I use both x100 and m8 side by side all the time. One of the only reasons I keep the x100 is minimum focus distance. I love a close focusing 35mm lens. The Fuji focuses way closer than a rangefinder and also has macro capability that is decent. The M8 can only focus to 2.5 feet unless you zone focus with a wides. I find it amazing how often I need focus within 1.5 feet.

 

However, I like the output from the m8 a lot more than the Fuji. Then again, the. Fuji can give me good results from 6400 ISO at steady 1/4 second handheld. Amazing when you need it. But during the day and not close up, the m8 wins hands down for me.

[Frase]

I bought a fuji x100 while my m9 was being repaired back in Germany I thought it was a brilliant camera perfect size for going out when photography wasn't the main reason for going out if you know what I mean, loved the macro and the evf. But the files at low ISO were not anywhere close to the M9 which is quite similar to the M8. Overall thought it was a great camera but sold it as I worried I would not use my M9 as much.

[GAS]

I have an M8, a M6 for film and a Fuji x100s, the last one being a big improvement over the x100. I am glad that I didn't have to decide, which cam to keep, I had to sell my Hasselbladequipment though to finance the Fuji. In my opinion it depends, what your stIle of shooting is - its like comparing a Rangerover and a Mercedes limousine. They both drive on streets but on a highway you will prefer the Benz and you will be happy to own a Landy driving in the woods. I use the Fuji in the streets (also in low light situations) taking candit shots which I can't take with the M8. Using hyperfocus with the M8 there often is a greater debt of field that I don' t like or want, its nice but often too slow. But thats only an example - there are other times, when the Fuji has to wait in the shelf. So don' t ask which one "drives" better, first decide which (photographic)road you will be travelling.

Good luck - Frank

[don_panko]

Not to hijack this thread but my two most used cameras are my M8 and iPhone. They are all that I really need.

 

A serious camera for planned photo shoots and a pocket camera that is always at hand. With attention to lighting and with post processing I can make acceptable images from either source.

 

What is even more compelling is that the comfortable old time camera interface of the M8 is being matched by a comfortable smart phone interface the more that I use it.

 

I'm sure that visionaries can see this convergence to the hand held device and the road to get there. I'm enjoying the ride with a foot in both camps.

[pfhrased]

One thing I did forget to mention - the M8 has considerably better file sharpness. The difference is like night and day, compared to the X100 shots. I'm guessing much of that is due to the X100's Antialiasing filter.

Then again, I sometimes look back at my M8 shots and feel that they're much clearer than my M9 shots too..

 

Best bet imo is to just bite the bullet and try it. If you get a second hand M8/M8.2 for a decent price and you don't like it, you'll lose very little selling it on.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[hepcat]

A little different perspective... they're two different tools for different jobs.

 

The M8 is a system camera with a coincident rangefinder focusing system. It takes interchangeable lenses and all of the accessories and lenses work with every other M mount Leica body, film or digital. You buy one set of lenses and a Visoflex III and you're competent to do whatever comes along. It is a manual focus manual exposure camera that demands that you understand the nuts and bolts of photography and the properties of light to use it to its fullest.

 

The X100 is small and light and a true point and shoot disguised with a viewfinder. It's competent for many things, but you really only have to be concerned about composition. Everything else is taken care of for you.

 

So... which suits your needs and competencies better? Figure that out and you have your answer.