h00ligan Posted September 29, 2010 Share #21 Posted September 29, 2010 Advertisement (gone after registration) From a recent veview: "Behind the lens sits the V-LUX 2's image sensor' date=' with 14.1 effective megapixel resolution. The 1/2.33-inch RGB MOS image sensor is a large part of enabling the camera's impressive speed, and reducing image noise. Analog-to-digital conversion is integrated into the sensor itself, along the edge of the array. The pixel structure has minimized wiring area, and uses a "Micro Light Tube" structure that increases transmission efficiency from the micro lens to the photo diode below, minimizing signal loss and crosstalk between adjacent red, green and blue pixels."[/quote'] The sensor is tiny and not even close to the same ballpark as either camera mentioned. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted September 29, 2010 Posted September 29, 2010 Hi h00ligan, Take a look here DSLR or X1? Suggestions welcome for upcoming buyer. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
ravinj Posted September 29, 2010 Share #22 Posted September 29, 2010 If sensor size was the criteria then anything smaller than medium format is useless. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ezc203 Posted September 29, 2010 Share #23 Posted September 29, 2010 I love my X1, but like someone mentioned before it is a complimentary camera, not really a "one-and-only" camera. Get the 7D and some nice R lenses Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardM8 Posted September 29, 2010 Share #24 Posted September 29, 2010 I'm sure someone can dance out some charts, but no need to go prime if you don't want. The 17-55 is a 2.8 non l lens, $1200 and as or more sharp than the x1 as well. I have had the Canon 17-55 f/2.8 for years. A truly excellent lens. Arguably the best midrange zoom there is for APS-C and beating most - if not all - of it's red striped L cousins in the same range. Even after 4 years it had a very good resale value. A brilliant lens. But it's also big, heavy and expensive. And definitely not as sharp as the X1 lens across the range. But sharpness is not everything. The way the lens draws, (micro)contrast and how it renders colors is just as important as sharpness. And this is where the X1 is way better than this (or any) Canon zoom. I read in an article from Edwin Puts that one of the key 'secrets' of the excellent IQ from the X1 is that Leica designed the lens specifically for the sensor. This is a design aspect that isn't possible with SLRs and also what makes the output of the X1 better than the sum of its parts. But this is all apples'n oranges. You can't compare a fixed lens compact camera with limited features and speed with a full featured superfast SLR with interchangeable lenses. This is simply too much apples'n oranges imo. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
elansprint72 Posted September 29, 2010 Share #25 Posted September 29, 2010 The sensor is tiny and not even close to the same ballpark as either camera mentioned. You have personal experience of the V-Lux 2? You have seen the output of the V-Lux 2? The answer to both is surely no. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tsungtak Posted September 29, 2010 Share #26 Posted September 29, 2010 I am a professional photographer and 3 weeks ago I bought the Leica X1, I absolutely love it. I shoot more random pictures and have fallen in love with photography again. And I have the X1 with me at all times. When I go on location for a shoot I take my big Nikon with a zoom and I also take the X1. The Nikon stays on the tripod and I walk around and shoot with the X1. So it is a tough question, the Canon can do a lot of things but you will use the Leica X1 more. I think when people have this question dlsr or the X1 and won't buy both, they probably should consider the 4/3 cameras. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
phancj Posted September 29, 2010 Share #27 Posted September 29, 2010 Advertisement (gone after registration) I have been using the X1 since Feb and I can honestly say my D300 is gathering loads of dust. Have only used it for macro product shots since. The X1 is with me almost always. Doesnt matter how great the hefty dslr is if we are reluctant to bring it out. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jsrockit Posted September 29, 2010 Share #28 Posted September 29, 2010 I think when people have this question dlsr or the X1 and won't buy both, they probably should consider the 4/3 cameras. This is very true... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
h00ligan Posted September 29, 2010 Share #29 Posted September 29, 2010 If sensor size was the criteria then anything smaller than medium format is useless. Oh boy. Am I the only one paying attn to the op? I'm not suggesting the flux is no good for anyone but when someone is considering the x1 or a 7d pointing them to a rebranded panasonic point and shoot with a tiny sensor dissent seem like a very good recommendation. The x1 is great in that it gives dslr results in a tiny package. The vlux doesn't offer near the iq of either. @Pete If I know a bucket is specced to hold five gallons, I dint have to buy one to verify it won't hold 20. There are plenty of shots out there from the zs7, do you think leica magic pixies will totally change the output? No, it will have a different physical look, better software, a longer warranty, and be more expensive. It's more than reasonable to assume that given all the other rebrands. sensor size is a physics issue, not a subjective one. Sure for everyone the reduction from medium format they are willing to take is a personal choice...but the drop off from aspc to point and shoot is very very dramatic. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
fotografr Posted September 29, 2010 Share #30 Posted September 29, 2010 Oh boy. Am I the only one paying attn to the op? I'm not suggesting the flux is no good for anyone but when someone is considering the x1 or a 7d pointing them to a rebranded panasonic point and shoot with a tiny sensor dissent seem like a very good recommendation. If you ask your wife, she'll tell you size isn't everything. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jsrockit Posted September 29, 2010 Share #31 Posted September 29, 2010 I'm with h00ligan. The OP is looking for a DSLR replacement which would lead one to think sensor size comes into play. I guess there are two ways to look at a DSLR replacement though. (1) Comparible sensor size but in a smaller package (X1, GXR, X100, NEX) or (2) A huge zoom range in a small package (VLux, etc). That is why the u4/3 stuff is a great compromise between the two... you get a decent sized sensor, you can have your assortment of lenses (both primes and zooms), and they are compact. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
fotografr Posted September 29, 2010 Share #32 Posted September 29, 2010 I'm with h00ligan. The OP is looking for a DSLR replacement which would lead one to think sensor size comes into play. That depends entirely on what his end use is. If he just wants to put photos in an online album, email low res files to family and friends, and make an occasional small print, he doesn't need a large sensor. If he wants to make 20x30 prints to hang, then he has to take sensor size into consideration. We don't know the answer, because he didn't specify--thereby leaving the door open for other ideas. If he wants to dismiss any suggestions made here, let's give him the benefit of doubt and assume he has the intelligence to do that on his own. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
h00ligan Posted September 29, 2010 Share #33 Posted September 29, 2010 If you ask your wife' date=' she'll tell you size isn't everything.[/quote'] My 4'10" girlfriend thinks size matters a lot! Btw if web presented shots at f11 equiv are all the op needs, it's fine. I just hope the op will have very limited control over dof in the smaller cpsensor cams, which could be good for architecture I suppose. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jsrockit Posted September 29, 2010 Share #34 Posted September 29, 2010 My 4'10" girlfriend thinks size matters a lot! Did you just diss yourself? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lerc42 Posted September 29, 2010 Author Share #35 Posted September 29, 2010 mixed answers in the post...all the way from canon lenses to size doesn't matter...ha! When I said street shots by no means did I want to say action shots...I'm talking about Robert Polidori "Metropolis" type shots where he captures the face of the city with its buildings, streets, and architectures...or I can't remember his name but he's a famous Italian black and white photographer of city's who published a book on Milan...anyone know? anyways, that's the type of shots I'm looking for, city shots, nothing moving, but to capture the street, the city, the buildings. If I go for the Leica it would entirely be as a secondary camera to accompany my SLR.... the reason I put up the post was to see if anyone, with the same category of photography as me (architecture, city, street) would recommended the fixed Leica lens... keep up the replies, they are all helpful and hilarious at times. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
h00ligan Posted September 29, 2010 Share #36 Posted September 29, 2010 Did you just diss yourself? or was I giving myself props! Or was your dirty mind concocting things and all I meant is she wished she was bigger ??? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jsrockit Posted September 29, 2010 Share #37 Posted September 29, 2010 Or was your dirty mind concocting things and all I meant is she wished she was bigger ??? Yep, that's where my mind went with it... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
h00ligan Posted September 29, 2010 Share #38 Posted September 29, 2010 completely believable.... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rob_x2004 Posted September 30, 2010 Share #39 Posted September 30, 2010 keep up the replies, they are all helpful and hilarious at times. As a user camera, the seven D is going to eat the X twenty ways to chrismas plus some, and is entirely more flexible and competent platform. If for whatever reason you arent brave enough to be seen with a camera and need to hide a svelte form factor under the trenchcoat then sure the X1 delivers stellar files, we've just yet to see anyone present one but that is not the cameras fault. On the VLux2 bollocks all I will say is this, this, this and this from an earlier and lower spec'd incantation, and leave you to compare it to the touted X1 bird shots to make up your own mind. Happy Xing. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
phancj Posted September 30, 2010 Share #40 Posted September 30, 2010 mixed answers in the post...all the way from canon lenses to size doesn't matter...ha! When I said street shots by no means did I want to say action shots...I'm talking about Robert Polidori "Metropolis" type shots where he captures the face of the city with its buildings, streets, and architectures...or I can't remember his name but he's a famous Italian black and white photographer of city's who published a book on Milan...anyone know? anyways, that's the type of shots I'm looking for, city shots, nothing moving, but to capture the street, the city, the buildings. If I go for the Leica it would entirely be as a secondary camera to accompany my SLR.... the reason I put up the post was to see if anyone, with the same category of photography as me (architecture, city, street) would recommended the fixed Leica lens... keep up the replies, they are all helpful and hilarious at times. based on what you are saying now, as a secondary camera, and if the price is ok, I would say it's a no-brainer. Get it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.