Sean Reid's X1 Part 2 Review is up

[ottocrat]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

the X1 camera *is* about zone focusing, f/8 and all that. but i can do that on my M.

 

what i've been looking for -- i call it the anti-RF but i really mean i want it for all the things the M can't do or doesn't do well -- is also for more than an f/8 shooter. i want low light, night shots, probably in bars, outdoors cafes, etc. and i'd like to shoot wide open. the X1 at f/2.8 does not appeal to me (i realise this is completely subjective, but it honestly annoys me) so i'm searching elsewhere.

 

at first i thought the new Ricoh GXR 50mm was too long for me, until i realised that's been what i've been shooting with day in, day out (35 on the M8) and that i really like this FOV... whilst it's wrapped in a package that is nowhere near as attractive (or small, especially if you consider the lens does extend), what it has inside is more of what i've been looking for (which, with Ricoh's snap settings, does not preclude street at f/8).

Sounds like we're looking for the same thing. Problem is, I'm also looking for something in a small package; and if I miss it by a smidgeon, then I might as well miss it by a mile. By which I mean that the Ricoh with its quite bulky 50mm lens module won't get in my pocket (or my briefcase) any more easily than a D700 with the 50/1.4 would. I'm thinking that we're just not yet there with the compact bodies that can offer fast wide-open shooting in low light.

 

Though to be honest if the X1's lens was a 50mm EFOV I think it would do for me.

[coup de foudre]

Sounds like we're looking for the same thing. Problem is, I'm also looking for something in a small package; and if I miss it by a smidgeon, then I might as well miss it by a mile. By which I mean that the Ricoh with its quite bulky 50mm lens module won't get in my pocket (or my briefcase) any more easily than a D700 with the 50/1.4 would. I'm thinking that we're just not yet there with the compact bodies that can offer fast wide-open shooting in low light.

 

Though to be honest if the X1's lens was a 50mm EFOV I think it would do for me.

 

gotcha completely!

 

we are looking for the same thing and, no, it's not there... either compromise now, or wait and pray (as i have been doing after my misguided DP! purchase).

 

for you, the X1 might work. it really is a sweet little jewel of a thing. can you put a 35mm on your D700 and give it a whirl? i've found that i tend to prefer wider, the smaller i go. it's much easier to get closer, unnoticed. even if you're with friends or colleagues and whatnot, they kind of laugh when you shove it in their faces (especially after a few). i know you haven't discounted it altogether and i don't think you should. i honestly think it may be perfect for you... don't discount the 35mm until you've had a chance to play with it in a smaller camera.

 

i am personally likely to go for the Ricoh and thankfully i've got a purse to put it in. no, it's not the pocket cam i've wanted, but it has more of what i'm looking for... i only have rangefinders with fast glass and whilst it can be fun to challenge myself, i'd really like the luxury of good high ISO (i can't tell you how much i'm drooling thinking about your D700) in at least one camera i own. i'm also after a certain look, the ability to get closer, live view, yada yada. the lens extension on the GXR may end up being a deal breaker for me.

 

for your wants and needs, though (as well as Tenor1), i think this may be perfect. and who knows? 35mm might become your favourite new FOV

[ottocrat]

Yeah, the smart money would probably still be on me walking out of the shop with an X1 some time in late January...

 

Good suggestions, thanks - sadly I don't have a D700, just an ageing D70, so my (beloved) 35mm f/2 Nikkor is effectively a 50mm - but for precisely the reasons you suggest I've been walking around for the past couple of weekends with my Sigma 10-20 on it, stuck at 20. It's not exactly the same thing but it's helping me get my head around a wider field of view as 'standard'.

 

There's only one thing for it: I'll have to get myself up to town one of these weekends and spend some time playing with the X1. I can read all the reviews and forum discussions I like but it won't make up my mind for me.

[jsrockit]

i have honestly learned not to even to listen to what other people think (unless they are praising one of my images) and just judge for myself...

 

I agree...

 

Also, for a compact camera in the $1500-2000 range, why should we have to accept compromises? I think we all kind of want the same thing (give or take a few features). A few companies are getting closer, but none have hit the nail on the head. I'm hoping a few players come in and do it kind of right at the $700-1000 range which makes it easier to accept compromises.

[nhabedi]

I think we all kind of want the same thing (give or take a few features).

 

Based on the comments about the X1 in this forum from the last few weeks I'd rather say we all want very different things. If it were so easy to identify "what we all want", then I'm sure some vendor would have built the damn thing by now...

[coup de foudre]

Based on the comments about the X1 in this forum from the last few weeks I'd rather say we all want very different things. If it were so easy to identify "what we all want", then I'm sure some vendor would have built the damn thing by now...

you're telling me we all wouldn't pretty much die if someone came out with a digital Hexar? stealthy silence, instantaneous focus -- even in low light, f/2 sharp lens, built-in bright optical finder, instant shutter? add live view, great high ISO, fast RAW... need i go on?

 

i often despair that vendors could give a shit about us. much as we don't like to admit it, we are a very small minority of those they are trying to appeal to.

[jsrockit]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

you're telling me we all wouldn't pretty much die if someone came out with a digital Hexar? stealthy silence, instantaneous focus -- even in low light, f/2 sharp lens, built-in bright optical finder, instant shutter? add live view, great high ISO, fast RAW... need i go on?

 

Yeah, that's the same thing I want...

[nhabedi]

you're telling me we all wouldn't pretty much die if someone came out with a digital Hexar? stealthy silence, instantaneous focus -- even in low light, f/2 sharp lens, built-in bright optical finder, instant shutter? add live view, great high ISO, fast RAW... need i go on?

 

Well, I would certainly like to have such a beast. I already wrote about this some time ago.

 

Still, if you go through the existing X1 threads in this forum, there were lots of different wishes which weren't necessarily compatible with the concept of a "digital Hexar".

 

i often despair that vendors could give a shit about us. much as we don't like to admit it, we are a very small minority of those they are trying to appeal to.

 

I guess we are a small minority or at least perceived as such by the vendors. Maybe cameras like the X1, assuming it is successful, will change that. But of course, if we don't buy it (I won't), how will anybody know what we're asking for?

[jsrockit]

Still, if you go through the existing X1 threads in this forum, there were lots of different wishes which weren't necessarily compatible with the concept of a "digital Hexar".

 

I think that has to do with the fact that manufactuers aren't even close to a digital hexar... so we look at what is available and all add on a few things that are realistic / necessary in our minds. Myself, I want a fixed lens (35mm lens equiv) rangefinder camera that isn't over $2000 and provides decent image quality. However, since noone is making one, I was thinking of compromising with the X1. Instead, I'm back to thinking the M8 is my only option.

[hexar]

COUP DE FOUDRE I am since the first edition of any digital camera looking for a digital HEXAR AF and still it is not on the market. I assume I am a DON QUICHOTTE that will not be heard in this dessert of overcommercialized tools we should shoot our pictures with. A digital M9 would do the job for me but is not financially achievable. Any other alternative in speed and controls would be a DSLR with a 35mm (film) focal length lens covering this. How much biggger and overdone would this be compared to a HEXAR AF. Since I heard from the LEICA X1 I could wishfull think about this thing . But how much less sophisticated as a photographic tool it is than a analogue equivalent from the 80`s. Men is capable of flying to mars but this seems to be far too complex !?!?!?

[okram]

Sean, I would like to see that Eggleston movie!

My students probably too.

 

 

Thanks ,

 

 

 

Marko

[coup de foudre]

Men is capable of flying to mars but this seems to be far too complex !?!?!?

i understand what are saying!

 

i think the problem is more the simplicity of what we want, rather than the complexity... i think it will take somebody high up in a company to have a soft spot and a desire for the camera we're wanting, rather like the Epson R-D1 -- which is still my all time favourite digital camera. all simplicity, all elegance in use, all born out of some man's love of rangefinders with the power and money to make it happen. it did, and the history of digital rangefinders began.

 

perhaps there is some man or woman out there that has the same dreams we do?

[hexar]

I do believe that LEICA`s thoughts were ours when they started on the drawing board with the LEICA X1 but the technical problems to overcome (fast AF) are too big for them at this moment at time. Maybe if the shutter lag issue will be solved in the final version I will start with the X1 anyway and keep following developements to come.

BUT THE SHUTTER LAG HAS TO BECOME ACCEPTABLE EVEN IF IT ONLY EXITS IN THE "LOOK BACK" MODE AS SEAN EXPLAINED. ALSO THE DISTANCE SCALE IN MF SHOULD BE EXTENDED ! OTHERWISE THIS CAMERA REMAINS A TOY FOR DANDYS AND LUIS VUTTON BAGS !

[ottocrat]

for your wants and needs, though (as well as Tenor1), i think this may be perfect. and who knows? 35mm might become your favourite new FOV

You know, I was having a bit of a think about this and going back over some of my photos. I realise that many of my favourite shots would probably have worked out well if I'd been using a 35mm lens and zooming with my feet. I dug out a few examples here - I'd be interested in your thoughts, not for the quality of the photos, which are nothing special - indeed I'm a bit embarrassed at how I butchered some of them - but more on whether you think that the X1 would suit someone who likes to shoot these kinds of subjects. I'm finding it hard to form an objective opinion on this. (FWIW most of these were shot with a 50mm lens - sorry about the lack of shooting data, many are old scans from negatives.)

[jsrockit]

I dug out a few examples here - I'd be interested in your thoughts, not for the quality of the photos, which are nothing special - indeed I'm a bit embarrassed at how I butchered some of them - but more on whether you think that the X1 would suit someone who likes to shoot these kinds of subjects.

 

I like to make photos like this too...and once used a 50 as my lens, now I prefer 35mm. I feel that it is kind of like a 50, in that it is still normal enough to not distort too much, but you can cram a little more into a photo in a tight spot.

[jsrockit]

perhaps there is some man or woman out there that has the same dreams we do?

 

I sure as hell hope so... someone has to be thinking of it. It isn't going to be Leica. Konica isn't going to do it as Sony. Canon or Nikon? Probably not. Epson / Voigtlander / Zeiss ... god, I hope so!

[hexar]

Dear Sean,

 

Is there an embargo on your teleconference you had with LEICA yesterday? There must be interesting issues you disucssed with them. Could you tell us something about their comments on your review and their intentions/possibilities to tweek the shortcomings ?

Best regards

HEXAR

[Guest stnami]

Sean I was writing about the days when their style was most eminent, not as individuals. The public no longer tolerates someone sticking a camera in one's face. Sure hop into some nice safe environments,markets, tourist spots, friends etc and all is great but even Mary may get the shits with her image on a web site and will bypass the law in order to have her image removed. Most here will never place themselves is a iffy situation and will keep their distance.

 

Then again this site is about cameras and pixel peeping not photography

[Jamie Roberts]

{snipped}The public no longer tolerates someone sticking a camera in one's face. {snipped}

 

And on the other hand they instantly see the super zoom someone with a dSLR is toting, and which is why hip-shooting with an M is so great, and why Leica may need to rethink the way their manual focus range on the X1 works (I don't know; I haven't seen it; just going by the reviews I've read). I can't believe it's not trivial to set it up for f4 and 8 feet and just shoot.

 

It's downright easy and accurate to hip adjust an M with a 24 or 28 or 35, so no-one sees you put the camera in someone's face.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[coup de foudre]

You know, I was having a bit of a think about this and going back over some of my photos. I realise that many of my favourite shots would probably have worked out well if I'd been using a 35mm lens and zooming with my feet. I dug out a few examples here - I'd be interested in your thoughts, not for the quality of the photos, which are nothing special - indeed I'm a bit embarrassed at how I butchered some of them - but more on whether you think that the X1 would suit someone who likes to shoot these kinds of subjects. I'm finding it hard to form an objective opinion on this. (FWIW most of these were shot with a 50mm lens - sorry about the lack of shooting data, many are old scans from negatives.)

absolutely!

 

(btw, no need to apologise for lack of technical data, etc. i could frankly give a flying fig about most of that -- the image is all!)

 

seriously, there isn't a huge difference between 35 and 50 for your type of shooting, other than the occasional possibility of falling in water i've always preferred to work with primes and only run into difficulties now and again with the actualities of space (not wanting to fall onto the tracks of a metro station) and close focus with a rangefinder (i get fed up up with .7m and a lot of my lenses are at 1m)... otherwise, i really do prefer to shoot with my legs!

 

i think you will find that having a smaller camera will free your legs and allow you to experiment more. you can get more or less the same shots you're already taking with the combo you're using, get more if you choose, or have the freedom to get up close with a non-intimidating camera. plus -- no excuse not carry it with you all the time! most people will probably want a close look, so you definitely should be prepared for taking a shot of them before handing over your baby

 

obviously, yes, check it out first. but, honestly, i think this could be perfect for you.