Digilux 2 owners' opinion on X1

[kamilsukun]

Seeking the opinion of the Digilux 2 owners.

What do you think about the image quality produced by X1?
.

[wda]

Kamil, I have both cameras and they are very different. The D2 has a fabulous fast Summicron zoom lens, whereas the X1 has a fixed lens. Both are very capable cameras. However, if you compare the 35mm equivalent focal length of the D2 with the Elmarit lens on the X1, the X1 is far superior for printed images larger than about 10"x8". After all, you are comparing an old 5 mega-pixel sensor on the D2 with a more modern 12 mega-pixel APC sensor on the X1; the latter is clearly far superior.

The X1 is more compact and discrete in use and is more likely to be a companion on outings. In contrast, I still use my D2 extensively for personal photography because I just love its ergonomics and bounce flash. I don't often use flash with any of my cameras. But in certain domestic situations, the bounce flash on the D2 is a remarkable asset. (See "Happy youngster" in the Leica portfolio on my website link below. In that shot I used a side wall to bounce the flash onto the subject to give a soft side lighting effect)

I hope that helps to answer your question.

[wilfredo]

I've been surfing through the various photos on the X1 forum and except for this one by harry Liem, I haven't been impressed by the sharpness or detail in the images. The micro-contrast on the X1 Elmarit is not very impressive. The images are akin to my former Canon 5D images taken with my former 24-105mm Canon "L" lens. Not bad at all, but they lack punch.

The M8 files and D2 files IMHO offer more of a Leica stamp. I will keep my eye on future X1 images but in all honesty, regardless of price, this is not a camera I am drawn to. What I have seen thus far does not excite me.

[kamilsukun]

David, Wilfredo,

Thank you for your answers.

In fact, X1 has very attractive specifications. A quite portable hi-res Leica with a 35mm equiv. lens. A dream for all serious Leica photographers.

I am also grateful to all photographers who very kindly submitted sample images of their early X1 images.

Despite the fact that X1 images are capable of printing to larger sizes than D2, the images we have seen so far have a common 'something'. Something I am very reluctant to name.

Is it coldness or lack of some optical spirit?

I don't really know. Perhaps it is all intended to justify the price difference with a similar setup with M9.

What I have seen so far reminds me the photographs made during 1940s. Sharp, old school lenses producing sharp images. But, something is definitely missing.

I very much wish, it is all a result of the photography made during the early stages of ownership of a new camera and my impressions are invalid.

We all deeply respect the efforts of Leica staff and the institution's noble investor for their dedication and hard work to keep the legend alive, pursuing the road to excellence.

[jsrockit]

Perhaps it is just too clinical and clean at all ISOs?

[kamilsukun]

Originally Posted by jsrockit

Perhaps it is just too clinical and clean at all ISOs?

I wouldn't object the cleanliness at all ISO's but do to the clinical but/and planar resolution.

[LuxBob]

Originally Posted by wilfredo

I've been surfing through the various photos on the X1 forum and except for this one by harry Liem, I haven't been impressed by the sharpness or detail in the images. The micro-contrast on the X1 Elmarit is not very impressive. The images are akin to my former Canon 5D images taken with my former 24-105mm Canon "L" lens. Not bad at all, but they lack punch.

The M8 files and D2 files IMHO offer more of a Leica stamp. I will keep my eye on future X1 images but in all honesty, regardless of price, this is not a camera I am drawn to. What I have seen thus far does not excite me.

Wilfredo I have liked your pictures and therefore your opinion is interesting.
I keep vacaillating between an X1 and an M8. the X1 is neat but not perfect, the M8 is said to have poor high ISO performance. Do you find that, subjective though it is? In saying this I realise that I have to investigate myself but as I have started....
My favorite camera is still my D700 but it is bulky for family trips, the D2, I know this is heresy, is a bit of a clunker - I need more pace and response and my R8, while possibly the most beautiful and tactile camera ever, no longer fits with my way of working, except on nostalgia trips. So the choice is X1 or M8. I like punchy and I have to say until I PP the D700 is not that punchy. I like prints up to A3+ and am doing some around 1m by 2m but they will be form the D700 and probably stitched.
While autofocus would suit me I am from a generation where you kept the camera stopped down and everything form 3M to infinity was in focus. If you have time then you can fiddle.
What am I saying - just wandering, I think there is no alternative but to go and try both.

[jsrockit]

As a owner of both LuxBob, the M8 is more versatile than the X1 in so many ways and whatever high ISO advantage the X1 has can be negated by f/1.4 lenses. You have to think long and hard if a 35mm lens is going to be enough, if the AF being slow on the X1 is going to bother you, and if you will still want the M8 after you buy the X1.

[wilfredo]

Originally Posted by LuxBob

Wilfredo I have liked your pictures and therefore your opinion is interesting.
I keep vacaillating between an X1 and an M8. the X1 is neat but not perfect, the M8 is said to have poor high ISO performance. Do you find that, subjective though it is? In saying this I realise that I have to investigate myself but as I have started....
My favorite camera is still my D700 but it is bulky for family trips, the D2, I know this is heresy, is a bit of a clunker - I need more pace and response and my R8, while possibly the most beautiful and tactile camera ever, no longer fits with my way of working, except on nostalgia trips. So the choice is X1 or M8. I like punchy and I have to say until I PP the D700 is not that punchy. I like prints up to A3+ and am doing some around 1m by 2m but they will be form the D700 and probably stitched.
While autofocus would suit me I am from a generation where you kept the camera stopped down and everything form 3M to infinity was in focus. If you have time then you can fiddle.
What am I saying - just wandering, I think there is no alternative but to go and try both.

Low noise is not a forte of the M8 but that seldom becomes an issue for me. Most of the time I set the ISO to 320, and if need be to 640. With a fast lens you should do very well. My fastest M lenses are f/2 and I still get very good results such as this shot with the camera set to 640 ISO. IQ is more important to me than noise. If low noise is an issue I have a Canon 5D Mark II. That aside, I've always said right from the start when the M8 first came into the scene that M8 files have a quality that is uniquely M8, something in-between film and digital. I still favor the M8 for B&W work even if I'm getting excellent results with my Canon 5D Mark II DSLR. The X1 files I've seen for the most part, look too much like most of the DSLR stuff out there with less than the best lenses, no real Leica punch. A3 prints are no problem for the M8. The D2 also has it's own signature and I've really grown attached to my D2, it kicks butt.

Having said all this I have to confess that this is my very subjective humble or perhaps not so humble opinion. There is nothing scientific about my observations.

[wilfredo]

These are two D2 color shots from yesterday. Virtually no PP. The D2 seems to require less PP than any other camera I've ever owned, and all done in JPEG mode to boot.

The third shot is one of my favorite M8 portraits.

[wda]

Wilfredo, three excellent pictures which capture the scene, mood and presence.

[kamilsukun]

Wilfredo,

This IS the 'optical spirit' I mentioned within my earlier post in the thread. It is there in all of your 4 excellent examples. Particularly the calligraphy photograph. Thanks for sharing.

And very unfortunately most of the X1 shots I have seen so far lacks this 'optical spirit'.
.

[LuxBob]

Originally Posted by wilfredo

Having said all this I have to confess that this is my very subjective humble or perhaps not so humble opinion. There is nothing scientific about my observations.

No need to be humble Wilfredo, your work speaks for you. I think it is in Malcolm Gladwell's (famous for Tipping Point) book Blink that he talks about the accumulation of experience that tells you something but you are not able to say why i.e. your subjective opinion and it is particularly important in artistic situations. Or to put it another way, your opinion is worthwhile listening to.

[kamilsukun]

D2 reflecting centuries...

The ground stones of Hagia Sophia, Istanbul.
.

[wda]

Here is a Digilux 2 picture of my X1 fitted with the optional hand-grip and viewfinder. It is for an article prepared for the Leica Fellowship Newsletter in the UK. Nothing specially 'Digilux' about my example, but evidence that it can take technical or product shots competently. (More of my comments on this subject in the Viewfinder thread.)

[kamilsukun]

Originally Posted by wda

Here is a Digilux 2 picture of my X1 fitted with the optional hand-grip and viewfinder. It is for an article prepared for the Leica Fellowship Newsletter in the UK. Nothing specially 'Digilux' about my example, but evidence that it can take technical or product shots competently. (More of my comments on this subject in the Viewfinder thread.)

David,

This is a very Digilux photograph. Beautiful...

Now, will an X1 photograph of the Digilux follow?

[wda]

Kamil, may be; but the X1 would not be my first choice for close product shots. The Digilux is perfect which is why mine is in constant use even today. One does not replace the other. The X1 produces very much better quality pictures beyond the close up range and within its 36mm focal length.

[lazaruz]

Originally Posted by kamilsukun

. . .
And very unfortunately most of the X1 shots I have seen so far lacks this 'optical spirit'.
.

i have looked at virtually every x1 photo posted online- and have seen many good images-yet none like the caligraphy photo above or even the D2 photo of the x1 above...

bueller...bueller..anyone??

[kamilsukun]

Originally Posted by wda

Kamil, may be; but the X1 would not be my first choice for close product shots. The Digilux is perfect which is why mine is in constant use even today. One does not replace the other. The X1 produces very much better quality pictures beyond the close up range and within its 36mm focal length.

David,

I am sure X1 will produce remarkable photographs in your capable hands.
.

[kamilsukun]

Originally Posted by lazaruz

i have looked at virtually every x1 photo posted online- and have seen many good images-yet none like the caligraphy photo above or even the D2 photo of the x1 above...

bueller...bueller..anyone??

Lazarus,

Very unfortunately my observations overlap with yours. However I am sure we all wish to (and believe will) see much better examples very soon.
.