Leica X1 impressions and directions

[DRabbit]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I initially balked at the price too.

 

But if you think about it, the E-P2 + Panasonic 40mm f/1.7 Lens is going to run you about $1400-$1500. Yes, you may get more flexibility (for more money), however, you aren't going to get the same level of image quality. The X1 is clearly more expensive, but not THAT much more expensive. If it suits your style, it's worth it.

[Guest Chris M]

Although some may disagree the X1, to me, is not an entree to the Leica family. There are far less expensive Leica-badged cameras (by Leica standards anyway) that allow you to proudly show your photos here as genuine Leica photos that we all comment and gush over.

 

As your first Leica you're far better off getting a used M8 and a used M lens than getting the X1 and then wondering how much you'll get back when you decide to 'trade up'.

 

No to me the X1 is just what it is. A smaller, more compact way to produce superb, DSLR quality images in a compact (albeit somewhat flawed) body without having to lug rock of Gi-NikonCanonSonyPentax-bralter around your neck.

 

 

Yes ,you could'nt have said it better! I agree that the X1 is what it is, a "small lite weight, tool, kind of like the throw away cameras, in the cence that it is a fixed lens ,35mm equivalent. However, (the Quality of the files being produced) are equivalent too that of the M8 and M9, which is only possible because of the fact that sensor chips keep on improving, ever so slightly now at that cost (value) price range for there manufacturers, and Leica was able too implement it into a small package (X1), kind of like C4 explosives, small and lite but very powerful. X1 should be demoed and tried out first, because its like going back in time. I don't agree with people saying it is a companion camera to what ever. It is just another tool, and is limited, too street and landscape photography and family shots, so if your in a rush or trying to shoot tele don't waste your cash, this is a GEM of a camera, and must be fully understood and excepted by it owner first, to fully unleash it POWER and POTENTIAL.

 

chris m.

[flappo]

I've got a d lux 4 and having seen an X1 , I'm very impressed by it.

 

I don't really use the zoom on the dl4 much , preferring to stay at the wide angle setting and cropping afterwards ( if needed )

 

I really don't think the fixed lens of the X1 is that big a deal tbh.

If I had the dough I'd buy one tomorrow.

[jsrockit]

I, for one, would not buy the X1 if it had a zoom.

[reginaldwatkins]

IMHO you lose image quality while zooming. I was happy there was no zoom on the X1.

[h00ligan]

I initially balked at the price too.

 

But if you think about it, the E-P2 + Panasonic 40mm f/1.7 Lens is going to run you about $1400-$1500. Yes, you may get more flexibility (for more money), however, you aren't going to get the same level of image quality. The X1 is clearly more expensive, but not THAT much more expensive. If it suits your style, it's worth it.

 

hmm... that's really not a fair comparison at all.

 

You could get an ep-2 with 17mm/2.8 and no evf for $900, less than half of the leica. You could get it with the 14-42 for the same price, and buy a panasonic 20/1.7 for another $350// still substantially less with two lenses.. you could sell off the 14-42 after getting the 20 and again be at half the price.

 

Plus you do get video if that sort of things matters, you can mount legacy lenses for great shots with MF.

 

I'm not suggesting the mft cams have the same IQ, they certainly don't above iso 200/400, but they do also come with real IS for those who prefer, and i don't think the comparison in price was fair at all...because you get one lens with the Leica, and no vf for 2k.

 

I'd think the sigma dp2s is probably closer to the x1 for a comparison.. and it's just over a third of the price of an x1.

[DRabbit]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

hmm... that's really not a fair comparison at all.

 

You could get an ep-2 with 17mm/2.8 and no evf for $900, less than half of the leica. You could get it with the 14-42 for the same price, and buy a panasonic 20/1.7 for another $350// still substantially less with two lenses.. you could sell off the 14-42 after getting the 20 and again be at half the price.

 

Plus you do get video if that sort of things matters, you can mount legacy lenses for great shots with MF.

 

I'm not suggesting the mft cams have the same IQ, they certainly don't above iso 200/400, but they do also come with real IS for those who prefer, and i don't think the comparison in price was fair at all...because you get one lens with the Leica, and no vf for 2k.

 

I'd think the sigma dp2s is probably closer to the x1 for a comparison.. and it's just over a third of the price of an x1.

 

I compared the ep2 with panny lens because it's the closest in specs to what is on the X1. Similar focal length, similar depth of field, and the panny produces much nice images than the kit lens or even the 17mm.

 

I agree, for an ep2 kit you get quite a bit of camera and nice flexibility... And maybe it suits some people very well (I have one and enjoy it). However, versatility and video is only important if you need it... I seem to shoot mostly at 35-50mm even when I have a zoom capable of wider and longer. It's just the way I "see"... So the versatility just isn't that important... In a lot of cases I'll pick the better IQ of the X1. And yeah, you get HD video with the ep2... Thing is, with the ep1 I had since last July I shot exactly one video... And that was only to test out the capability of the cam! LOL

 

We all have to pick the tools we like... I still stand by my comparison especially if you're looking for the best out of the ep2. It's okay if we disagree... Lucky for us we have lots of choices in cameras and it looks to be a good year for those of us who like them small

[Guest badbob]

hmm... that's really not a fair comparison at all.

You could get an ep-2 with 17mm/2.8 and no evf for $900, less than half of the leica. You could get it with the 14-42 for the same price, and buy a panasonic 20/1.7 for another $350// still substantially less with two lenses.. you could sell off the 14-42 after getting the 20 and again be at half the price.

Plus you do get video if that sort of things matters, you can mount legacy lenses for great shots with MF.

I'm not suggesting the mft cams have the same IQ, they certainly don't above iso 200/400, but they do also come with real IS for those who prefer, and i don't think the comparison in price was fair at all...because you get one lens with the Leica, and no vf for 2k.

I'd think the sigma dp2s is probably closer to the x1 for a comparison.. and it's just over a third of the price of an x1.

 

I don't think price -vs- performance comparisons are useful with the X1, since it's a "real Leica" that's partly hand made. You're paying half of that $2000 for those Leica things, so if you aren't interested in those, then why agonize over the price?

[h00ligan]

I don't intend initiate price/performance claims against the x1, I do think that for those who process raw, if mft is brought as a comparison, there are better comparisons as I said. Shooting raw, a gf1 kit for 900 w/20mm does everything the pen does, with a flash, and more quickly... at least in my comparisons.

 

You're right Amy, disagreement is fine You are doing great stuff with both!

 

I don't think that mft is up to the iq of the x1, particularly in iso performance.