Why X1 with Leica?

[patrick parker]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

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).

 

Matus,

 

I used both TTL and the original M6 extensively so did a few of my friends who are decent photographers. One of many advantages of the M series is you can work very fast with them. With some practice the dials slide between your fingers almost on their own without you loosing your concentration. One of these dials is the shutter speed. M6 TTL reversed the shutter dial also made it bigger. They tried to match it to their reflex cameras which should have been the other way around, because while leica was making reflex cameras there were a lot of decent slr s out there but no rangefinder like M6.

This reversing of the shutter dial was a pain in the ass for us who weren't used to it.

I took it upon as a challenge and got used to it and good thing I did , now I'm very comfortable with the M9 because the shutter dial is is similar to the TTL apart from the annoying fact that it doesn't stop at one point, just keeps on turning ( no way of knowing what speed you are on unless you look at the dial)

 

The other thing I didn't care about the TTL was I always thought It wasn't built as well. Mine had a lot of rangefinder shift problems, it had to be adjusted everytime I dropped the camera. Never had this problem with the M6. Also the M6 sounded better TTL has a hollow sounding click especially at 250.

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[patrick parker]

. . .

 

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....

 

I agree that it's easier to master than any other digital compact out there.

[wda]

Why should I buy M9 with 35mm? What is sooooo much better then X1? Is M9 really worth the money?

Why confuse the two? The M9 is the heart of an excellent potentially costly camera system; whereas the X1 is a complete, but limited (in the sense of having a fixed lens) precision compact camera. You are not comparing like-with-like!

[hhanebeck]

Hi Patrick

 

first of all thanks for taking a critical view. I think this is very healthy for the forum whether or not I and others agree. This doesn't strike me as the "you can only praise Leica" site but as rather a discussion forum. Diversity of opinion makes this a more interesting site.

 

I do want to take you up on a finer point though ...

 

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 ...

 

I understand that you might agree that the "lesser" products in recent years might be justified in the light of getting exceptional cameras such as the M9 now. Still, to take your earlier automotive example, here is a list of companies that do not exist any longer ... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_defunct_United_States_automobile_manufacturers

 

What many of these organizations had in common was "a little too much respect for the past." I, for one, am truly glad that Leica did not choose to self-distruct just because the old guard might not be happy about a natural progression. The company had to reinvent itself and did a fantastic job. Please keep the doors open is all I can say!

 

Obviously, products are faulty and, of course, improvements are always necessary. That is perfectly normal. Can you show me a software program that was perfect right from the start? I know of one: the control system in the Space Shuttle. It cost $6 billion to develop and it is close to perfect. Now, we'd be paying millions of bucks for an X1, if Leica had taken the same approach to perfection.

 

I have taken over 20,000 shots with my X1 and have never had a quality issue. Never even felt that the "Leica genes", as you call them, are missing. So, what exactly is that DNA that makes it a Leica?

 

Great design - the X1 get's my vote on that.

Ease of use - yes ... that's why many of us are here and not in the "Canon Forum" where you get a toaster, an espresso maker and a gazillion Megapixels all in one neat little device.

Stellar IQ - abslutely. Better than some products in higher price segments.

Pride of ownership - yes, as you can tell, many here have that, which is a good thing!

Exceptional quality - yes, but at a cost. A more perfect camera might be the M9 or the S2. I believe they are, but haven't found one for $2K, yet.

 

Leica must have done a few things right with the X1. No doubt it isn't perfect. But your argument that it should be "right" from the first production run, taken to the extreme, means that you can only drive a Roller, can only live on Park Avenue, only vacation on the Cote Azure, only feast on Beluga, only drink Krug and only use little silk strips in your bathroom. That is obviously absurd and I believe you'll agree. In essence, you might be asking for more than most of us can afford. The X1 strikes an excellent balance between the Leica DNA and a good price point. If there is one thing I hate about the X1, it is that it gives you the Leica bug and that spells financial ruin in the long run. : )))

 

Cheers, Chris

[phancj]

Chris,

 

I agree with you.

 

TO add, having felt the Leica film bodies and comparing the digital Ms (and more so in the X1) one can definitely discern a tremendous difference in durability and robustness. The film bodies give a solid feel of rugged dependability and almost looks indestructible when holding them in hand while the digital bodies look nice but have a much less solid feel, not that they are not solid, but they feel much less rugged than their film counterparts.

 

CJ

[NZDavid]

...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...

 

So, should Leica have respect for its past or focus on the future? Perhaps both. But it's obviously impossible to keep all of the people happy all of the time. I think the statement that Leica made cameras from the 80s on that "anybody could have made" is wrong and can't go unchallenged. For years, the Leica M was the only rangefinder still being produced.

 

 

...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?...

 

Nostalgia ain't what it used to be! What's wrong with nostalgia anyway? I think the Leica X1 looks damn cute. But it's not just nostaIgia. It is actually function. I find the curved body fine to hold without a grip, and I have large hands and big fingers (usually one thumb covers the whole keypad on a cell phone; those dinky buttons and fiddly menus on most other digital products are a real pain!).

 

Agree, the dials are too loose. But their basic design is a brilliant triumph of clarity and so much better than squinting at an LCD while pressing a dinky button and turning a dial.

 

I've never noticed "sparkly disco ring" and nor has anybody else.

 

....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 have the M6 and love it. But the M, as discussed, is a very different camera (and for me, more versatile). I have the Ricoh GR-D, and it's good, but I far prefer the design of the X1. I also think the X1 is very well built.

 

...I would have been much happier if X1 delivered half the image quality but all function this "wanna be" promises.

 

Don't quite get this, I think you are saying you would have preferred less IQ but better functionality? I think speed was always going to be a drawback with an APS-C sensor in a compact body (for complex reasons discussed elsewhere on this forum) and Leica made a clear decision to go for IQ. If you want more versatility in a compact package, go for the D-Lux 5 -- which I really like, although, once again, I prefer the design concept of the X1.

 

As I mentioned earlier, I think the X1 is different. It's a mini design classic, but follows in the steps of other classic high-quality film compacts such as the Rollei 35, Leica Minilux, Contax T2 and T3, and Minolta TC-1.

 

The Leica X1 is still just a compact though...and yet it has attracted criticism and comment far in excess of its diminutive size! This thread is surely adding to the X1's status as a cult camera.

[jsrockit]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Sure.

 

What a dilznick.

[patrick parker]

What a dilznick.

 

c'mon jsrockitjarkeice,

 

control your emotions.

[lykaman]

Hi, original Leica film cameras had NO vf & definately NO camera info displayed..

The photographer set the camera & off he/she went.. When the manufacturers started adding build in vf’s & then info within them we All got lazy”” .. What happened to the h/held light meter? (I still have mine)

The X1 and some other high end cameras are brilliant but different..a succinct learning curve as where the earlier SLR’s and other idiosyncratic cameras.. just look at the twin reflexes, upside down & reversed images, they took amazing images when used properly..

The manufacturers produce the best they can with price & market in mind.. At least the digitals can be firmware/software updated not so with film cameras.. I bet even digital Hass’s users have a few quibbles.

So, forget the negatives, remember the positives & go take pictures.....

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 badbob]

So, instead of leading the entire *world* with the best camera in (not one, but) three different categories (S2, M9, X1), they should have closed? Why is that? Out of embarrassment at being the best? Note to self: Don't expect logic here.

[patrick parker]

I think the statement that Leica made cameras from the 80s on that "anybody could have made" is wrong and can't go unchallenged. For years, the Leica M was the only rangefinder still being produced.

 

Wasn't talking about the M series. I obviously can not praise the M series enough. The cameras I was thinking of were a bunch of film compacts and of course half of the panasonic series.

 

I think the Leica X1 looks damn cute. 

 

I agree it's very cute.

 

I've never noticed "sparkly disco ring" and nor has anybody else.

 

I very much doubt that, it's right where the lens joins the camera. You can see yourself in it.

 

I also think the X1 is very well built.

 

I thought you agreed that the dials were loose.

 

Don't quite get this, I think you are saying you would have preferred less IQ but better functionality? I think speed was always going to be a drawback with an APS-C sensor in a compact body (for complex reasons discussed elsewhere on this forum) and Leica made a clear decision to go for IQ. If you want more versatility in a compact package, go for the D-Lux 5 -- which I really like, although, once again, I prefer the design concept of the X1.

 

I love the fact the image quality is called IQ. Yes I would have preferred less IQ if it allowed this camera to process faster.

 

As I mentioned earlier, I think the X1 is different. It's a mini design classic, but follows in the steps of other classic high-quality film compacts such as the Rollei 35, Leica Minilux, Contax T2 and T3, and Minolta TC-1.

 

Never really thought of these cameras as being cult items with the exception of rollei 35 s maybe. They are just good reliable machines. X1 may or may not end up reaching a cult status, who knows? Usually cult cameras are either produce images that are unusual or have unusual mechanics that have never seen before. X1 doesn't have these characteristics. The image it produces are wonderful but not different than any other camera with similar sensor. Aperture and speed dials on the camera are nothing new either.

 

What people like and dislike about cameras are surely personal. If it feels right it's probably the right camera for you, but there are also standards. No one has the right to say anything if someone says " i know it's got it's faults and drawbacks but I love this camera" What I can not understand is every time there is a discussion about the certain obvious shortcomings of this product somebody defends the camera by pointing out the image quality. The image quality of this camera will be considered shit in a few years but will be regarded as excellent for it's time. What will remain is an idea. X1 is a good idea but is executed horribly.

[patrick parker]

Hi, original Leica film cameras had NO vf & definately NO camera info displayed..

The photographer set the camera & off he/she went.. When the manufacturers started adding build in vf’s & then info within them we All got lazy”” .. What happened to the h/held light meter? (I still have mine)

The X1 and some other high end cameras are brilliant but different..a succinct learning curve as where the earlier SLR’s and other idiosyncratic cameras.. just look at the twin reflexes, upside down & reversed images, they took amazing images when used properly..

The manufacturers produce the best they can with price & market in mind.. At least the digitals can be firmware/software updated not so with film cameras.. I bet even digital Hass’s users have a few quibbles.

So, forget the negatives, remember the positives & go take pictures.....

 

 

twin reflexes don't show upside down images. just left to right reversed. We should never forget negatives in the digital age of photography, they are still better in B&W.

[prk60091]

twin reflexes don't show upside down images. just left to right reversed. We should never forget negatives in the digital age of photography, they are still better in B&W.

 

i think you are right about the TLR the early Brownies (I have a few on a shelf at home) have a "viewfinder" which shows upside down

[Guest badbob]

Wasn't talking about the M series. I obviously can not praise the M series enough. The cameras I was thinking of were a bunch of film compacts and of course half of the panasonic series.

 

 

 

I agree it's very cute.

 

 

 

I very much doubt that, it's right where the lens joins the camera. You can see yourself in it.

 

 

 

I thought you agreed that the dials were loose.

 

 

 

I love the fact the image quality is called IQ. Yes I would have preferred less IQ if it allowed this camera to process faster.

 

 

 

Never really thought of these cameras as being cult items with the exception of rollei 35 s maybe. They are just good reliable machines. X1 may or may not end up reaching a cult status, who knows? Usually cult cameras are either produce images that are unusual or have unusual mechanics that have never seen before. X1 doesn't have these characteristics. The image it produces are wonderful but not different than any other camera with similar sensor. Aperture and speed dials on the camera are nothing new either.

 

What people like and dislike about cameras are surely personal. If it feels right it's probably the right camera for you, but there are also standards. No one has the right to say anything if someone says " i know it's got it's faults and drawbacks but I love this camera" What I can not understand is every time there is a discussion about the certain obvious shortcomings of this product somebody defends the camera by pointing out the image quality. The image quality of this camera will be considered shit in a few years but will be regarded as excellent for it's time. What will remain is an idea. X1 is a good idea but is executed horribly.

 

Personal taste and preference don't make a camera the best of its kind - engineering does that. Some people who have an axe to grind just have a blind spot to that simple fact - the X1 is still the best camera in its size class. As to being horribly executed, it was almost perfectly executed with better controls and menus than most small cameras, and needed only some software fixes to polish it up. Still, cranky users who have no alternative will continue to flog the dead horse.

[patrick parker]

Personal taste and preference don't make a camera the best of its kind - engineering does that. Some people who have an axe to grind just have a blind spot to that simple fact - the X1 is still the best camera in its size class. As to being horribly executed, it was almost perfectly executed with better controls and menus than most small cameras, and needed only some software fixes to polish it up. Still, cranky users who have no alternative will continue to flog the dead horse.

 

 

There are many Leica cameras I like, I still buy new cameras and lenses from Leica.

Do you think I have something personal against one camera?

Badbob you've been a bad, bad, bad, bob again.