X1 vs the M9 for low light only

[jsrockit]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

The X1 does ok at night if there isn't too much movement. Here's some of my recent shots: Paris by night - a set on Flickr

 

However, if you've seen some of the results from the M9 with a Noctilux, I think it blows away the X1. http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/people/146078-babe-watch.html

 

$2000 vs. $17000?

[JeTexas]

True, but the original poster already had both the M9 and the X1.

[jsrockit]

True, but the original poster already had both the M9 and the X1.

 

Ah, then he can even just buy a Nokton 1.1 for $1000 and be ahead as well...

[Guest X1s]

Thats funny coz without flash the shots out of my X1 is better than even many of that which comes out of my nikon D300. I am talking about low light conditions. I dont know how low before the AF starts to struggle but I have used f2.8 iso 1600 shutter speed 1/60 to photograph my dog in a dimly lit room without AF problems.

 

In fact I think the high iso performance of the X1 being so good compared to the M9 means it is better for low light, that is compared to say the M9 with a summarit or elmarit, not the lux. The M9 images are pretty noisy at moderate iso, but the images are sharper than the X1 OOC before sharpening.

 

Each has it strengths I think.

 

I am in the balance of whether I should get the M9, its smaller than my DSLR but heavy and compared to the X1 does not impart a lot of size advantages. Then there is that compromised high iso performance and lack of AF. I like the lux images but frankly lately I have been looking at my nikon all over again and the portraits that come out of my new AFS 85mm f1.4G are astounding with superb bokeh, I dare say a certain "Leica look". I'll try further and compare to the 35 cron and 50 lux which I will be privy to trying when they arrive (currently all sold out). My Nikkor 35mm f1.4G is also on preorder so I am looking at this very objectively. In any case both the M9 and my Nikkor primes command good resale so I do not worry too much about buying and trying.

 

But my DSLR is big and clunky, but the M9 is so expensive and I gotta baby it and take good care. The X1 and the DSLR I dare to rough it out more.

 

Honestly right now I do not see myself comparing the X1 with any other camera because it is so tiny and light, the 35mm equivalent is the most useful, and it takes fantastic photos. I think I'll keep the X1 for good.

 

The M9 vs DSLR decision will take me a little while more, but at the back of my mind I think I may most likely end up with both. The Ms appear more suited for wide angle to normal photography, DSLRs forte is in the big zooms, telephotos, and macro. At the end of the day, somehow I think each system will find a niche in my hobby.

 

The X1 stays the most used. I just lugged the DSLR with 85mm f1.4g today and it aint fun compared to the X1 in my belt pack.

 

I know that you are a proponent of the X1, however no matter what you say, I am speciflically talking about the OP's concerns about low light, Not IQ or picture quality. We all agree that the X1 (may out perform) other digi slr's and the such, but? the X1's ability to (FOCUS IN LOW LIGHT) is marginal at best, and the mass majority Here on this forum and thread will concur with that. So if you have a moving or static subject and a tripod set up in (dimly lit conditions) you will (struggle) in such a situation to get the focus. Thats all I'm saying. It is not most peoples first or second choice for such shooting. It may however be (your) only choice? I have tested this out under many lighting conditions and I gotta tell you, there are much better solutions, and they don't need to be leica. The X1 may however ?? improve a little with some in house FW update, lets wait and see.

 

emma

[phancj]

I know that you are a proponent of the X1, however no matter what you say, I am speciflically talking about the OP's concerns about low light, Not IQ or picture quality. We all agree that the X1 (may out perform) other digi slr's and the such, but? the X1's ability to (FOCUS IN LOW LIGHT) is marginal at best, and the mass majority Here on this forum and thread will concur with that. So if you have a moving or static subject and a tripod set up in (dimly lit conditions) you will (struggle) in such a situation to get the focus. Thats all I'm saying. It is not most peoples first or second choice for such shooting. It may however be (your) only choice? I have tested this out under many lighting conditions and I gotta tell you, there are much better solutions, and they don't need to be leica. The X1 may however ?? improve a little with some in house FW update, lets wait and see.

 

emma

 

Emma,

 

Yes Emma, I am a proponent of the X1, and IMHO rightly so. The X1's AF IS INDEED slower than many cameras, but it is dead accurate. I do not know how dark is the low light you are talking about but I always use AF and just snap in the dark and every shot is in focus. I urge you to try RF focusing on the M9 in the dark, I think unless you are a true expert and with really good eyesight it can be tricky. It comes down to a question of the X1 having a distinct advantage of AF, which makes focusing a breeze and I contend MUCH FASTER than the M9 or in fact anything with manual focus. Even in the film days we struggled in low light without AF. Of course here we are talking about the average amateur, not seasoned pros. But then seasoned pros probably take good photos with lomography better than me with an M9:p

 

Attached 2 photos taken with the X1's AF, absolutely no probs. I posted some also in the photo forum all night shots all in focus and all using AF. Here's the only two on my comp at present. The AF did not struggle.

 

On the other hand if you are trying to shoot really fast moving objects like birds at night then I think unless you are a seasoned expert most cameras will not do, that is , fast moving objects in very very low light. MAybe only the top DSLRs with fast glass, and most likely AF coz MF will be too slow too, prefocus works only if the moving object moves in a predictable path.

 

And Emma, the X1 is not my only camera and choice. I use a DSLR for work and use exclusively primes. Just got the new AFS 85mm f1.4 G, helluva lens I must say. But the whole bulk does bother me. Thats why I say, the X1 is great because of passably great IQ in a tiny package. You can sing your tunes to the cows come home and you'll still be hard pressed to find a camera this size with this IQ and yes, even passably good AF in the dark.

 

Attached 2 of first few test shots with my 85mm f1.4G, try getting what you want in focus at f1.4 by MF good luck. Unless you are a pro. So back to the question: Is the X1 or M9 better for low light? I dunno, but if speed is your thing the X1 will be faster for me at least, MF in the dark for me? No thanks.

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[Guest X1s]

Phancj, these shots you have posted may be shot at night, but all your subjects are (well lit) with allot of contrasting for the slow auto focus to latch on too. You make a statement that the X1 is faster than an M8 or M9, ha ha lol, in the proper hands of an (experienced M8-9 user) the X1 gets smoked. Phancj, you have made it clear to most were you stand, and I have not said any thing grossly negative about the X1, but you really need to except the fact that there are many other options (MORE SUITED) for low light and (DIMLY LIT SUBJECTS) and situations.

Lets see some really dimly lit shots of static photo's on say? example... a dark street with a person standing under a dimly lit mercury vapor lamp? from say 20 feet away, good luck;)

I'd like to see the meta data on the subjects you posted above and also how much post processing have you done?

 

 

emma

[ChiILX1]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Emma,

 

Yes Emma, I am a proponent of the X1, and IMHO rightly so. The X1's AF IS INDEED slower than many cameras, but it is dead accurate. I do not know how dark is the low light you are talking about but I always use AF and just snap in the dark and every shot is in focus. I urge you to try RF focusing on the M9 in the dark, I think unless you are a true expert and with really good eyesight it can be tricky. It comes down to a question of the X1 having a distinct advantage of AF, which makes focusing a breeze and I contend MUCH FASTER than the M9 or in fact anything with manual focus. Even in the film days we struggled in low light without AF. Of course here we are talking about the average amateur, not seasoned pros. But then seasoned pros probably take good photos with lomography better than me with an M9:p

 

Attached 2 photos taken with the X1's AF, absolutely no probs. I posted some also in the photo forum all night shots all in focus and all using AF. Here's the only two on my comp at present. The AF did not struggle.

 

On the other hand if you are trying to shoot really fast moving objects like birds at night then I think unless you are a seasoned expert most cameras will not do, that is , fast moving objects in very very low light. MAybe only the top DSLRs with fast glass, and most likely AF coz MF will be too slow too, prefocus works only if the moving object moves in a predictable path.

 

And Emma, the X1 is not my only camera and choice. I use a DSLR for work and use exclusively primes. Just got the new AFS 85mm f1.4 G, helluva lens I must say. But the whole bulk does bother me. Thats why I say, the X1 is great because of passably great IQ in a tiny package. You can sing your tunes to the cows come home and you'll still be hard pressed to find a camera this size with this IQ and yes, even passably good AF in the dark.

 

Attached 2 of first few test shots with my 85mm f1.4G, try getting what you want in focus at f1.4 by MF good luck. Unless you are a pro. So back to the question: Is the X1 or M9 better for low light? I dunno, but if speed is your thing the X1 will be faster for me at least, MF in the dark for me? No thanks.

 

Nice shot of the bottle!

 

In response to Emma, I agree with Phancj. I'd only add to Emma that if you are so concerned with autofocus in such abyss-like conditions at exactly 20 feet away or more, just set the MF on infinity! It doesn't get any faster!

[phancj]

Phancj, these shots you have posted may be shot at night, but all your subjects are (well lit) with allot of contrasting for the slow auto focus to latch on too. You make a statement that the X1 is faster than an M8 or M9, ha ha lol, in the proper hands of an (experienced M8-9 user) the X1 gets smoked. Phancj, you have made it clear to most were you stand, and I have not said any thing grossly negative about the X1, but you really need to except the fact that there are many other options (MORE SUITED) for low light and (DIMLY LIT SUBJECTS) and situations.

Lets see some really dimly lit shots of static photo's on say? example... a dark street with a person standing under a dimly lit mercury vapor lamp? from say 20 feet away, good luck;)

I'd like to see the meta data on the subjects you posted above and also how much post processing have you done?

 

 

emma

 

Emma,

 

I already said for a real experienced M9 user they'll smoke the X1, so will they if they use a Nikon F4E. It;s the photographer not the tools.

 

THe shots have minimum PP, just pushing of sliders in PS/LR nothing significant. I do not erase all the metadata so you should be able to see them. In fact, I have posted so many shots without any PP at all OOC jpegs just downsized. The X1's jpeg in many instances are useable. I am a firm proponent of less PP (I'm lazy haha).

 

What I am trying to tell you of course there are many options, but for low light and fast moving objects or even focusing with f1.4 in bright light I'd use the DSLR and live with the bulk instead of trying MF. Case in point, the attached shot, this morning I took like almost 30 shots of this cat ALL in perfect focus all under 2 minutes(with my new toy the 85mm f1.4 Nikkor). Shots are either f1.4 or f2. Try that speed without AF. Same story for the X1. YEs the AF is slow, do you need to repeat it a zillion times? My point is the difference between having AF and not having it at all. Try an M9 at night and doing the RF thingy, the experts are ok with it, not me. I'd buy an M9 to shoot things that are stationery, or posed, or sacrifice shallow DOF and shoot off the hip for candid shots. But I do not think I'd try something like this cat shot, especially not few hundred shots all at wider apertures.

 

Your needs may differ, I am clear on mine. When traveling I'd always have the X1, it satisfies 90% of the shots I'd like to take. I'm still on the fence on the M9 coz of some issues I am experiencing including lack of available lenses here. But the M9 I'd buy for more considered shooting, and leisurely at that. For fast action, telephoto, macro, etc I need blazing fast AF. Including night shots. I like AF period. But I like the M9 lux images but do not think I'd shoot every day with it. My eyes are tired as it is from work daily and I can live with less strain. But I find the M9 capable of astounding images but do not see it to be a fast machine either (from my tests with it). For me each camera system has it uses and I like the option of deciding each day which one I take out. It's a nice hobby for me, thats it.

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[phancj]

Emma,

 

For a change it'd be nice if you can illustrate with some of your shots done with any other camera besides the X1 under low light. That way we can all see the differences and there is more basis for constructive comparisons.

 

Otherwise, it's always your constant rant about the slow AF of the X1 without meaningful alternatives. And I do not mean other users, I am specifically referring to your goodself since you said you shoot with many systems and it'd be nice if you can back up what you say with your own images. i am sure many here would like to see some.

 

CJ

[phancj]

I'm sure the X1 is great fun and quality to have, but you can't mount a noctilux or even a summilux on it...Nighttime with a M9 and Noctilux is magical.

As far as babying the M9 there are plenty of us out there that will tell you that's completely unnecessary.

 

Lawrence, I personally will not consider a $10K lens, gosh!

 

And if I ever did buy a $10K lens rest assured I WILL baby it.

 

I am in the midst of a M9 decision pending some lenses like the 50 lux and 35 cron which is out everywhere.

 

Meanwhile I am also collecting more Nikon glass. Just got the 85 f1.4 and waiting for the 35 1.4. I want to compare images of the lux vs these lenses. I will do a shootout in the Leica boutique before jumping in.

 

But to be brutally honest, despite all your kind assurances I do not think the M9 is as tough as the polycarbonate DSLRs. Nicer looking, very much polished and nice to hold, but relatively prone to scratched, dents, etc. If I drop my DSLR I wont feel much, but my M9 if I buy it, I think I'd mind given the price I would have paid??!!

 

The M9 has a jewelry like feel to it, so I'd like to keep it pristine. maybe just me.

[h00ligan]

The x1 has that same feel, even though it cost less than 1/3 I certainly don't think that the x1 is durable...and from what I have seen (don't own one) it dent appear the m digitals are either. I've certainly seen some torn up digital m's even when people say they babies them...meanwhile I could slap a screen protector on my 7d and call it a day.

[phancj]

The x1 has that same feel, even though it cost less than 1/3 I certainly don't think that the x1 is durable...and from what I have seen (don't own one) it dent appear the m digitals are either. I've certainly seen some torn up digital m's even when people say they babies them...meanwhile I could slap a screen protector on my 7d and call it a day.

 

Edward,

 

i dropped my X1 to the floor twice. Once I cracked only the lens cap, the other I dented the bottom. No big deal.

 

But the M9 at its price I would be REAL careful.

 

Hard to say really which is tougher, but the price of the M9 does put it into the "take care of it" category for me. The DSLR and X1 not so much..

 

CJ

[tom0511]

Both are doing fine in low light- I give the IQ edge to the M9, however the x1 is fine too.

Both are slower to use than a good AF (i.e. D700). Which of both is less slow? who cares.

One is small and near silent, the other one you can change lenses and there are faster lenses.

I wonder why care if one is a little bit better in IQ, or a little faster or slower etc etc since both deliever great IQ and both are limited as soon as you start shooting moving subjects (and I still use both more than my Nikon DSLR).

Ah-and for the poster who thought the street at night is not a shot in the dark: What do you shoot? Black houses without light in the dark?

[phancj]

Both are doing fine in low light- I give the IQ edge to the M9, however the x1 is fine too.

Both are slower to use than a good AF (i.e. D700). Which of both is less slow? who cares.

One is small and near silent, the other one you can change lenses and there are faster lenses.

I wonder why care if one is a little bit better in IQ, or a little faster or slower etc etc since both deliever great IQ and both are limited as soon as you start shooting moving subjects (and I still use both more than my Nikon DSLR).

Ah-and for the poster who thought the street at night is not a shot in the dark: What do you shoot? Black houses without light in the dark?

 

Agreed. DSLRs are much faster animals, but the Leicas more elegant.

 

The poster you mentioned apparently disappeared when I asked to see photos of his to illustrate the low light situations where his other cameras have excelled.

 

Got a strange feeling it again is needless Leica bashing. The X1 AF and the M9 RF focusing are both slow, but more than made up by the IQ and the discrete operation. From the street scene I posted (and I got a whole load more of these) not a single person is looking into the camera. Try that with a DSLR good luck.

[phancj]

Join the X1 Challenge:

 

 

Here's the thread to post your entries, remember nice prizes await the 3 winners!

 

Good Luck!

 

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/harmony/147473-%2A%2A%2A1st-x1-challenge-post-photos-here.html

[Guest stnami]

Rangefinder focusing is not slow it is the user that is slow.

 

Emma(X1s) phancie has limited needs photographically and doesn't place himself in marginal situations where the camera's focusing system is tested so the camera works quite well for him It seems for those that have greater needs and find them selves in situations of being fast and accurate there are better cameras in the market.

Most photographers start to suffer in the dark except for those with the ability to pre focus and zone focus accurately with a lens open wide and they are few and far between. Having said that these days with the advent of digital cameras with great high isos (by that I mean above 1600iso) it is quite feasible to shoot f4/f5.6 in the dark thus giving one a greater margin of error but this is DSLR territory in camera development at the moment. Good photos in marginal situations are about skill speed, intent and accuracy with the photographer using the right tools but that usually falls on deaf ears on this forum as it is more about the camera than the result here

 

Statements like "not a single person is looking into the camera. Try that with a DSLR good luck" are just silly

[Guest X1s]

Rangefinder focusing is not slow it is the user that is slow.

 

Emma(X1s) phancie has limited needs photographically and doesn't place himself in marginal situations where the camera's focusing system is tested so the camera works quite well for him It seems for those that have greater needs and find them selves in situations of being fast and accurate there are better cameras in the market.

Most photographers start to suffer in the dark except for those with the ability to pre focus and zone focus accurately with a lens open wide and they are few and far between. Having said that these days with the advent of digital cameras with great high isos (by that I mean above 1600iso) it is quite feasible to shoot f4/f5.6 in the dark thus giving one a greater margin of error but this is DSLR territory in camera development at the moment. Good photos in marginal situations are about skill speed, intent and accuracy with the photographer using the right tools but that usually falls on deaf ears on this forum as it is more about the camera than the result here

 

Statements like "not a single person is looking into the camera. Try that with a DSLR good luck" are just silly

 

Well it dosn't matter any ways, I have given my personal opinion about the X1. The good news is that I sold mine today for $1900.00 not bad just a $100.00 loss after 6 months of shooting. I think I'll sit on the cash till next year?

 

X1 is holding its value!!

 

emma

[phancj]

Well it dosn't matter any ways, I have given my personal opinion about the X1. The good news is that I sold mine today for $1900.00 not bad just a $100.00 loss after 6 months of shooting. I think I'll sit on the cash till next year?

 

X1 is holding its value!!

 

emma

 

I truly am happy for you, and good luck with your camera "hunt"!

 

And yes, the X1s are sold out in quite a few places...so it should still hold its value ok.

[Guest X1s]

I truly am happy for you, and good luck with your camera "hunt"!

 

And yes, the X1s are sold out in quite a few places...so it should still hold its value ok.

 

Well , I won't be hunting for a new camera yet as I recently bought an M9 and 4 new len's about 8 months ago. And I use my S2 for tele now. But have fun Phancj, I wish you well.

 

emma

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[ChiILX1]

Well , I won't be hunting for a new camera yet as I recently bought an M9 and 4 new len's about 8 months ago. And I use my S2 for tele now. But have fun Phancj, I wish you well.

 

emma

 

50k-60k on equipment! In that case what are we messing around for? If you are so fortunate why not have posted your own 35mm 2.8asph X1-M9-S2 comparison for us long ago??? What insights we could have gained! It would have been the final word! Instead you chose to assert without evidence that everyone else was wrong- when you could have just snapped 3 photos and posted them yourself?

 

By the way are you a celebrity? Because it seems you need to somehow add to the prestige of Leica Camera just by name to be able to buy an S2 right now.