hunz Posted February 17, 2011 Share #1 Posted February 17, 2011 Advertisement (gone after registration) Which set-up would you take? [bar the lens interchangabillity of the M8] Size wise the x100 is a tad smaller, and lighter. X100 has higher resolution: 12mp (vs 10MP) X100 looks like it has better high ISO performance Which has better handling, DR, I wonder Your pick, and why? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted February 17, 2011 Posted February 17, 2011 Hi hunz, Take a look here Leica M8 + 35/2.0 'cron vs Fuji x100 . I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
ezc203 Posted February 17, 2011 Share #2 Posted February 17, 2011 How about we wait for the X100 to be out before we debate this? Everything is theories and conjectures at this point. X100 is smaller, but so is its sensor. X100 has "higher resolution" - MP is the joke of the decade. Unless you make 20x30 prints regularly, 12MP vs 10MP is moot. More MP does not mean better images either. The new Nikon D7000 (or whatever) offers 16.2MP, but I'd trade it for the 5MP Digilux 2 in the blink of an eye. X100 has better high ISO performance - I'm not so sure about that. Haven't seen any sample images to suggest this (but I could just be not well-read in this area) Handling? Smaller/lighter does not mean "better". The size/form of the M8 (with Thumbs-Up) is perfection. I prefer it over the thinner film Ms (personal). My personal experience with cameras (limited as they are) suggest that the M8 has a phenomenal sensor. The depth of color produced is uncomparable. No 5D mark II, no Nikon D700 can come close. (I don't have experience with the more expensive Canikon options). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
hunz Posted February 17, 2011 Author Share #3 Posted February 17, 2011 My personal experience with cameras (limited as they are) suggest that the M8 has a phenomenal sensor. The depth of color produced is uncomparable. No 5D mark II, no Nikon D700 can come close.. please explain Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest stnami Posted February 17, 2011 Share #4 Posted February 17, 2011 the fuji is about shooting at 35mm the leica outfit isn't .................one has has AF and manual the other is manual only................one is a rangefinder the other isn't .........both are cameras that allow people to take pictures of boring stuff:) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
hunz Posted February 17, 2011 Author Share #5 Posted February 17, 2011 i find the X100 intriguing to a certain extent. Auto-focus could be a big plus for street shooting for fast grab shots without messing with manual focusing or hyper-focal. Sure it doesn't have an M-mount, but the new view-finder concept is interesting. Like the retro styling too. I have an M8 and 35 cron outfit already, but the X100 is rather tempting Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted February 17, 2011 Share #6 Posted February 17, 2011 The M8 has a AA-filterless sensor, the X100 a Cmos. The X100 has more in-camera noise processing and will produce a smoother image with less noise which many perceive as more digital-looking. The M8 will provide more microcontrast and "sharper" (whatever that means..) images. The lack of an AA filter will more than equalize the minimal Mp difference. The color depth of the M8 is comparable to a 12-bits camera, the X100 is an 8-bits camera, so the M8 is preferable in color terms. If that is worth the other differences between the cameras, including price, is for the buyer to decide. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jsrockit Posted February 17, 2011 Share #7 Posted February 17, 2011 Advertisement (gone after registration) Your pick, and why? I'd take both... The M8 will still undoubtably be funner to use and offers the ability to use old fast glass of many lengths (even on the cheap). However, the X100's high ISO is a huge plus. I plan to use both. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
hunz Posted February 17, 2011 Author Share #8 Posted February 17, 2011 Thanks for the tech info Jaap. I wonder about the DR of the X100 compared to the M8. Maybe I should just be happy with my M8 & 35 cron combo. Which reminds me what's the latest firmware for the M8? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
hunz Posted February 17, 2011 Author Share #9 Posted February 17, 2011 I'd take both... The M8 will still undoubtably be funner to use and offers the ability to use old fast glass of many lengths (even on the cheap). However, the X100's high ISO is a huge plus. I plan to use both. Too true. Nothing like being to use 95% of all M lenses ever produced. I'm interested in the X100's high ISO performance also, that's where low light shooting is not the greatest with the M8 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjh Posted February 17, 2011 Share #10 Posted February 17, 2011 The color depth of the M8 is comparable to a 12-bits camera, the X100 is an 8-bits camera, so the M8 is preferable in color terms. The M8 captures 14 bits and stores 8 bits; a comparison with an uncompressed raw format is difficult since Leica’s lossy format may be superior to uncompressed 12 bits in some situations and inferior in others. The X100 captures and stores 12 bits per pixel. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
charlesphoto99 Posted February 17, 2011 Share #11 Posted February 17, 2011 Lens wise the X100 would be most comparable to the M8 with a 28 summicron on it and not a 35. I think this is a dandy looking camera for the price but having an M9 would most likely make it redundant for me as it's not that much more portable. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted February 17, 2011 Share #12 Posted February 17, 2011 Lens wise the X100 would be most comparable to the M8 with a 28 summicron on it and not a 35... The Summicron 28 looks much sharper @ f/2 at first glance. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jerry_R Posted February 18, 2011 Share #13 Posted February 18, 2011 The more samples I see from X100 - the more they remind me Sony NEX results (AA filter, less of details). I have seen many X1 shots that I really liked. I haven't found so far such results from X100. Of course nothing stops us from waiting for more samples and RAW files. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
d2mini Posted February 18, 2011 Share #14 Posted February 18, 2011 I have seen many X1 shots that I really liked. I haven't found so far such results from X100. It's kinda hard to find photos from a camera that isn't available to the general public yet. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ezc203 Posted February 18, 2011 Share #15 Posted February 18, 2011 It's kinda hard to find photos from a camera that isn't available to the general public yet. My thoughts exactly. Can't we wait for this camera to be readily available to the public (and good photographers) to debate the results? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
hunz Posted February 18, 2011 Author Share #16 Posted February 18, 2011 Life is too short. why wait? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Essemmlee Posted February 18, 2011 Share #17 Posted February 18, 2011 both are cameras that allow people to take pictures of boring stuff:) Is this is known purchasing constraint of these two cameras? I assumed would be allowed to take photos of anything they wished. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest stnami Posted February 18, 2011 Share #18 Posted February 18, 2011 I assumed would be allowed to take photos of anything they wishedNo................ most don't bother to read the terms of purchase, page 87 paragraph 10b for the X1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted February 18, 2011 Share #19 Posted February 18, 2011 The M8 captures 14 bits and stores 8 bits; a comparison with an uncompressed raw format is difficult since Leica’s lossy format may be superior to uncompressed 12 bits in some situations and inferior in others. The X100 captures and stores 12 bits per pixel. I didn't know the X100 spec was 12 bit.Thanks, stored in memory . I seem to recall an article in your own magazine in 2007 where there was a nice graph showing the M8 bit depth compared to a 12-bits camera (Nikon?) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjh Posted February 18, 2011 Share #20 Posted February 18, 2011 I seem to recall an article in your own magazine in 2007 where there was a nice graph showing the M8 bit depth compared to a 12-bits camera (Nikon?) A generic 12 bit camera actually. Here’s the graph: The graph shows the finest differences in tonal value the raw file can differentiate across the camera’s dynamic range (so lower is better in this case). It demonstrates how the dynamic range of the M8 is that of a 14 bit camera even when a 12 bit camera writing uncompressed raw files can discern finer differences outside shadow areas (where this is less of an issue though). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.