anupmc Posted April 3, 2011 Share #81 Posted April 3, 2011 Advertisement (gone after registration) Seriously, do you have any lucid point to make, or you just enjoy reading your own rants? If you think the X1 is a flawed camera, fine, make your point and move on. But why do you stick around making useless flippant remarks in various threads? Some perverse fascination with Leica? yes I added two "a" s. I also added the car comment to the other one but that was before you answered. I don't think you are confused anymore. I really think you believe you X1 was improved not fixed. You are also saying that you did not use one before and use one after those changes were made. You are accusing me of editing the main content of my comment and want me to please not attack you. I almost forgot, you are also a moderator on this forum. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted April 3, 2011 Posted April 3, 2011 Hi anupmc, Take a look here Why X1 with Leica?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
phancj Posted April 3, 2011 Share #82 Posted April 3, 2011 Sad life, I say...all rants no joy! On the other hands, trolls will be trolls... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
robert blu Posted April 3, 2011 Share #83 Posted April 3, 2011 It's real a pity that a place, like the leica x1 forum, which could be used to exchange useful experiences, suggestions and ways to improve our knowledge and use of this camera in order to make photos is mainly used in most of the treads to complain this or that. If someone is unhappy of this camera I feel sorry for him but I do not see he can be more happy just because always posting his unsatisfaction. It does not help. Just sell the camera so long it is not yet too much depreciated. robert Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
patrick parker Posted April 3, 2011 Author Share #84 Posted April 3, 2011 It's real a pity that a place, like the leica x1 forum, which could be used to exchange useful experiences, suggestions and ways to improve our knowledge and use of this camera in order to make photos is mainly used in most of the treads to complain this or that. If someone is unhappy of this camera I feel sorry for him but I do not see he can be more happy just because always posting his unsatisfaction. It does not help. Just sell the camera so long it is not yet too much depreciated. robert i'm only answering to certain comments. if people need me to stop replying I would advise them to stop writing. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ivan Muller Posted April 20, 2011 Share #85 Posted April 20, 2011 hi Patrick, for someone like me who doesn't know Leica and who had one only briefly more than 15years ago before the X1, I don't actually know what the 'Leica genes' are. I have read a lot about it since I got the X1, but couldn't be bothered about Leica before. I bought it because DPReview said it had the best image quality of all the small cameras and I wanted a small camera to fit my new Billingham Pola bag and because I got it Cheap. I sometimes read (and post ) in this section but most of the time I just get out there and shoot, and I am more than pleased with the results, Leica genes or not.... Of course now I wonder what a M8 will be like but one look at the prices and well then I turn to canon and see that a nice sharp 80mm f1.8 will only cost me what I paid for my X1 viewfinder, and my 35mm f2 is decently sharp and on my 5d2 quality is as good as it gets even though its all plastic, Japanese, auto focus and more.... regards, Ivan Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matus Kalisky Posted April 20, 2011 Share #86 Posted April 20, 2011 Hello Patrick, you have managed to confuse (or even irritate) quite a few people with this thread But - do I get it right that the main point of your post was to share your opinion about the X1 saying that is was not (contrary to most M leica cameras) designed according to philosophy of ultimate functionality? My question is - why do you think that? To me ti seems that with the X1 Leica attempted to introduce a compact digital AF camera with high quality fixed focal length that can easily be taken "everywhere" and is offered at a price point which is more accessible to larger audience than M8/M9. Indeed the target group of customers is somewhat different than the one for M9. Now - the X1 has some quirks and some features/details could have been implemented differently, but considering the design of the cameras - what do you find to contradict the above mentioned philosophy? Some particular features (or lack of them), the shape of the camera, the omission of the viewfinder, the lens, or something else? If you were to propose the changes to (hopefully at some point coming) X2 - what would it be? I am honestly curios. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NZDavid Posted April 20, 2011 Share #87 Posted April 20, 2011 Advertisement (gone after registration) I had a quick flick through this post and have absolutely no idea what point the OP was trying to make, or why it has dragged on for so long. But surely he is being remiss in neglecting to mention the many other products that may have had some perceived flaw in them? Older Leica film compacts, perhaps (Minilux with EO5 error)? Or cameras by manufacturers of all kinds -- "cute" baby Rollei 35 with its odd film advance ever. Canon SLRs with new lens mounts rendering old lenses unusable. Giant SLRs designed for weight-lifters. Or cars of many and multiple hues? Why pick on the poor old X1? My suspicion is because it is -- and may become even more of -- a cult camera. Despite its flaws. It's pricey. It's different. It is definitely not one of the crowd. It attracts attention. And therefore criticism. Some of which is useful, if it leads to genuine improvements. But the rest is just words with no direction. Gotta get on with something productive... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fotograph Posted April 25, 2011 Share #88 Posted April 25, 2011 Indeed the target group of customers is somewhat different than the one for M9. Why should I buy M9 with 35mm? What is sooooo much better then X1? Is M9 really worth the money? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matus Kalisky Posted April 25, 2011 Share #89 Posted April 25, 2011 Why should I buy M9 with 35mm? What is sooooo much better then X1? Is M9 really worth the money? I am not sure I implicitly stated that M9 is better ... Well - the IQ is probably not the main reason (though there are obviously differences), but I guess the ability to use a lens like a Summilux may make a big difference if you need either low light or shallow DOF. The X1 at f/2.8 delivers about the same DOF as a 35 mm lens on M9 stopped down to f/4.0. Of course - one can get a full frame DSLR with 35/1.4 lens, but then the size of the setup grows quite a bit. And on top of that many prefer using the viewfinder/rangefinder rather than AF. So indeed - the X1 and M9 are different cameras and are directed to different customers with different needs. If I could afford it I would love to have the M9, but right now I am looking for a compact camera with as good IQ as possible and the M9 does not fit the size requirement. The X1 or Ricoh GXR do (marginally though). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lykaman Posted April 25, 2011 Share #90 Posted April 25, 2011 Hey Matus, what’s your issue? Mostly bad photographers or other tradesmen blame their tools.. I have used M6’s, R6.2’s, DL4’s, D300’s & now the X1, they are all excellent photographic tools..The camera is just a tool for the p/tog” to understand & use... I DO love my X1.. I used it exclusively on my recent European trip, I will post images very soon... No maybee”s the images from the X1 are amazing....... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fotograph Posted April 25, 2011 Share #91 Posted April 25, 2011 I am just afraid, when I buy M9 with 35mm only - I will say: hmmm.... I could buy X1 as well and safe my money - it would be a pain to think like this...... I need a camera for my USA trip. I use Nikon D3x with some good lenses for my work but its way too heavy to walk with. Many people say the "M" should be used with only one! lens - mostly 35mm - so whats the point? Why not just the X1? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matus Kalisky Posted April 25, 2011 Share #92 Posted April 25, 2011 It seems like I got misunderstood. Originally I only posted here to ask the OP what is his issue with the X1. I do not have any serious issues with the X1. There might be some details I might prefer to have been do differently, but that was not my point. I am the last on here to blame my gear for taking bad photos. I actually like the X1 very much and seriously consider to get one in the near future. I just keep agonizing about it for a few weeks more to appreciate the relief more once I will make the purchase Fotograph - indeed you are right. If you anyhow plan just to use 35 mm you may be served by the X1 perfectly. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
i-Leica Posted April 25, 2011 Share #93 Posted April 25, 2011 Fotograph - indeed you are right. If you anyhow plan just to use 35 mm you may be served by the X1 perfectly. Ok, now I will get my X1 too - just afraid I will take the "wrong" one with me Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fotograph Posted April 25, 2011 Share #94 Posted April 25, 2011 I don't think you really need both. But I will definitely buy X1. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
patrick parker Posted April 27, 2011 Author Share #95 Posted April 27, 2011 Hello Patrick, you have managed to confuse (or even irritate) quite a few people with this thread But - do I get it right that the main point of your post was to share your opinion about the X1 saying that is was not (contrary to most M leica cameras) designed according to philosophy of ultimate functionality? My question is - why do you think that? To me ti seems that with the X1 Leica attempted to introduce a compact digital AF camera with high quality fixed focal length that can easily be taken "everywhere" and is offered at a price point which is more accessible to larger audience than M8/M9. Indeed the target group of customers is somewhat different than the one for M9. Now - the X1 has some quirks and some features/details could have been implemented differently, but considering the design of the cameras - what do you find to contradict the above mentioned philosophy? Some particular features (or lack of them), the shape of the camera, the omission of the viewfinder, the lens, or something else? If you were to propose the changes to (hopefully at some point coming) X2 - what would it be? I am honestly curios. Hello Matus, If today's Leica had any respect for it's past they would have chosen to close down instead of producing most of the cameras they produced since the late 80's. True followers of the Leica designs may agree. So they chose to stay alive by putting the brand name on a bunch of cameras anybody could have made, as a result years later we ended up with a digital M , so maybe it was worthed. Including me ,many who has an attachment to this brand ignored a lot of Leica branded cameras and weren't really bothered by them. Unlike X1 they did not pose as Leicas, they were not worth picking up and examining, they did not look like there was a thought behind it. Leica I believe is selling nostalgia with the X1, not function. Why does it look like a Ur, function? If it was so damn comfortable to hold there wouldn't be a market for the handgrip or the thumbs-up attachments. If it's so small to fit in my pocket how come the dials are built so loose. They are at a different setting every time I pull out the camera. If I can take it everywhere and shoot without being noticed why is there sparkly disco ring around my lens? If you love your X1 and want to continue loving it don't ever try one of these cameras; Leica M6 ( original not TTL) , contax T3, Ricoh GR I, II, III. I would have been much happier if X1 delivered half the image quality but all function this "wanna be" promises. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jsrockit Posted April 27, 2011 Share #96 Posted April 27, 2011 If you love your X1 and want to continue loving it don't ever try one of these cameras; Leica M6 ( original not TTL) , contax T3, Ricoh GR I, II, III. I've owned and tried them all... with the exception of the M6, I like the X1 better than all of the rest. What works for you IS NOT the best for everyone else. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
patrick parker Posted April 27, 2011 Author Share #97 Posted April 27, 2011 I've owned and tried them all... with the exception of the M6, I like the X1 better than all of the rest. What works for you IS NOT the best for everyone else. Sure. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
prk60091 Posted April 27, 2011 Share #98 Posted April 27, 2011 . . . Leica I believe is selling nostalgia with the X1, not function. Patrick: the x1 is one of those cameras that either you get or don't. If you get it- it take images worthy of its heritage - if you don't get it the camera sucks. it took me about 6-9 months before i "got it". prior to "getting it" i actively thought about "upgrading to a m8/9" i even posted about it. now- i wouldn't think of selling it/trading it. the 35mm effective focal length- i get the IQ - i get the only thing that would get me to trade it- would be a version w/a 2.0 'cron attached. just like politics/religion/mac vs pc= no amount of "discussion" is going to get anyone to change their mind. the only thing that will.....is shooting with the camera and if it clicks w/you- it wins it over. it is definitely a niche product leica's mass market compact the d-lux5 takes good pictures and anyone (even my wife) can master it quickly.... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matus Kalisky Posted April 27, 2011 Share #99 Posted April 27, 2011 Thanks Patrick, now I see your point. I can not say that I fully agree, but even after short examination of the X1 I found the controls to be way too "lightweight" and the body shape not optimal and the body felt (not necessarily the reality) fragile. But I am one of the lucky ones who can put up with those things if the image quality is there But I can not avoid asking one more question - what makes the M6 and M6 TTL in your eyes so different - just the shutter dial? Note that I never had an Leica M in hand (sad, I know) I agree about the Ricoh GRD very well made (the same is true for GXR). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
patrick parker Posted April 27, 2011 Author Share #100 Posted April 27, 2011 I had a quick flick through this post and have absolutely no idea what point the OP was trying to make, or why it has dragged on for so long. But surely he is being remiss in neglecting to mention the many other products that may have had some perceived flaw in them? Older Leica film compacts, perhaps (Minilux with EO5 error)? Or cameras by manufacturers of all kinds -- "cute" baby Rollei 35 with its odd film advance ever. Canon SLRs with new lens mounts rendering old lenses unusable. Giant SLRs designed for weight-lifters. Or cars of many and multiple hues? Why pick on the poor old X1? My suspicion is because it is -- and may become even more of -- a cult camera. Despite its flaws. It's pricey. It's different. It is definitely not one of the crowd. It attracts attention. And therefore criticism. Some of which is useful, if it leads to genuine improvements. But the rest is just words with no direction. Gotta get on with something productive... Yes Manufacturers make mistakes. X1 for me has more than one. Why are you surprised to see someone pointing them out on an X1 forum? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.