Ecaton Posted August 3, 2011 Share #41  Posted August 3, 2011 Advertisement (gone after registration) NOT really. Same size of sensor, same size of prime, same highest f, almost same size of body - system or not, doesn't mater.I'm talking value for money! Should almolst be the other way round (X1 price vs 1000D with 24/2.8. X1 Jpegs are so-so; RAWs (DGN) are rather tricky to get right and require extensive editing to achieve nice results. Canons RAWs developed in DPP are much easier to tweak. X1 vievfinder is in my oppinion real pain, huge distortion and lack of AF point - for instance. X1 is a very nice point-n-shoot delivering sometimes great results (after some tweaking) but ridicously expensive - main cause of my chant! Andrzej www.audiomix.se/photo  Ok, you insist the Canon with the 24mm prime lens being of almost the same size as the X1, I don't, and neither does anybody who ever saw an X1 in its real flesh. Nobody would complain if the X1 was less expensive, had a better UI (you call it ergonomics) etc. But competition has not delivered the "better X1" yet. Among the compact fixed prime lens offerings I consider the X100 the better camera, but it is clearly bulkier. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted August 3, 2011 Posted August 3, 2011 Hi Ecaton, Take a look here My initial review of the Leica X1. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
napawino Posted August 3, 2011 Share #42 Â Posted August 3, 2011 You can't make a camera with classic good looks that has the ergonomics of todays DSLR's. It can't be done. I find the ergos of the X1 to be just fine, because it is small. Â It's a marvelous camera in all aspects. Except price, I suppose. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest drpix Posted August 3, 2011 Share #43 Â Posted August 3, 2011 I find the X1 raw files to be clean and sharp. I just convert to jpegs without much of any PP or none at all. I don't care much for oversaturated photos. I much prefer the look of what my eye actually sees. The X1 does that for me. Although the trend these days seems to be to make your photos "pop" with all this extra vividness. It just doesn't look natural. Grass is green. Not fluorescent green. Â Check Jim Radcliffs pics! He is my idol and inspiration. Maybe one day I can come close:) I also share his views on "natural" looking images. Everything is tweaked these days, either in camera/software/firmware or by photogs. People who want it "natural" are very often incapable to make their pics "pop" - and very seldom anyone will admit it! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
phancj Posted August 3, 2011 Share #44 Â Posted August 3, 2011 Check Jim Radcliffs pics! He is my idol and inspiration. Maybe one day I can come close:) I also share his views on "natural" looking images. Everything is tweaked these days, either in camera/software/firmware or by photogs. People who want it "natural" are very often incapable to make their pics "pop" - and very seldom anyone will admit it! Â Thats your personal opinion of what you want in your images. To my eyes in all honestly your images with the X1 were very good but I immediately felt the colors were way too garish to my taste (again, thats my personal opinion). Personally I also like images that are more muted and more natural, though I still like those that pop, but by virtue of the inherent "3D" qualities of the image, not so much for colors. Not sure if I am getting my point across, but anyway, my two cents. Â But then again you seem to shoot more buildings/landscapes (from the shots you pointed us to) whilst I do portraits and product shots. So maybe that has something to do with our different emphasis. Â CJ Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tc4237 Posted August 3, 2011 Share #45 Â Posted August 3, 2011 Check Jim Radcliffs pics! He is my idol and inspiration. Maybe one day I can come close:) I also share his views on "natural" looking images. Everything is tweaked these days, either in camera/software/firmware or by photogs. People who want it "natural" are very often incapable to make their pics "pop" - and very seldom anyone will admit it! Â not everyone uses a camera for commercial work which requires images to "pop"... there are people who take images for memories sake... learn to respect that... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest drpix Posted August 3, 2011 Share #46 Â Posted August 3, 2011 not everyone uses a camera for commercial work which requires images to "pop"...there are people who take images for memories sake... learn to respect that... I thought that people who spend this kind of money on a digicam maybe expect their images to "pop" (stand out); for "memories" you can use any camera. Btw, I respect everybody, mostly people who take pics:) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
napawino Posted August 3, 2011 Share #47 Â Posted August 3, 2011 Advertisement (gone after registration) He's trolling Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tc4237 Posted August 3, 2011 Share #48 Â Posted August 3, 2011 I thought that people who spend this kind of money on a digicam maybe expect their images to "pop" (stand out); for "memories" you can use any camera. Btw, I respect everybody, mostly people who take pics:) Â maybe an X100 user on fuji velvia mode ... and want your pictures to "pop" via color saturation... Â however, color saturation is not the only way to make images stand out... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest drpix Posted August 3, 2011 Share #49 Â Posted August 3, 2011 He's trolling I rest my case! Seems that ignorance IS the bless:) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
prk60091 Posted August 3, 2011 Share #50 Â Posted August 3, 2011 i'm guessing the Egypt photos are canon... Â My guess as well Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
prk60091 Posted August 3, 2011 Share #51 Â Posted August 3, 2011 Ok, you insist the Canon with the 24mm prime lens being of almost the same size as the X1, I don't, and neither does anybody who ever saw an X1 in its real flesh. Nobody would complain if the X1 was less expensive, had a better UI (you call it ergonomics) etc. But competition has not delivered the "better X1" yet. Among the compact fixed prime lens offerings I consider the X100 the better camera, but it is clearly bulkier. Â Truly the only ergonomic issue I had with the camera was the placement of the aperture ring on top instead of the more traditional location. I learned to work with the camera and that no longer bothers me. I hope "natural scrolling" on my new Mac will feel natural soon Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
phancj Posted August 3, 2011 Share #52 Â Posted August 3, 2011 In fact the first thing that struck me when I bought the X1 was its intuitive and minimalist controls and simple menu and non-convoluted UI. In canon you have layers and layers of menus and I find that frustrating, apart from buttons all over the place on the camera (ditto nikon but I personally find nikon's button placement more suitable for me). Â The X1 is IMO a very well thought out camera. Its simplistic menus and buttons make it a real joy to use, other qualities aside. Not so for DSLRs. Â CJ Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest drpix Posted August 3, 2011 Share #53 Â Posted August 3, 2011 My guess as well Wrong, Leica. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest drpix Posted August 3, 2011 Share #54  Posted August 3, 2011 In fact the first thing that struck me when I bought the X1 was its intuitive and minimalist controls and simple menu and non-convoluted UI. In canon you have layers and layers of menus and I find that frustrating, apart from buttons all over the place on the camera (ditto nikon but I personally find nikon's button placement more suitable for me). The X1 is IMO a very well thought out camera. Its simplistic menus and buttons make it a real joy to use, other qualities aside. Not so for DSLRs.  CJ  Why X1 is not the camera it might have been? . Leica engineers are besser-wissers - they ask "real photogs" oppinion and then design something opposite. . lack of proper grip on the body; the add-on is expensive and blocks the battery compartment. . original viewfinder with terrible barrel distortion and lack of central AF point. . switches easily movable and NOT very positive, firm clicks . LCD screen should have been much "better" for the money . coarse shutter speed stops . continuously stopping down aperture (IDIOTIC) . manual exposure not very "convenient", half pressure needed to see the effect of controls (histogram not ver accurate either) - why not copy what every Canon G has: manual exposure controls with live view (wysiwyg) All these, and some other minor "faults", could easily be ommited without any increase in production costs and together with camera's superb sensor and lens could really create totally unique tool - and maybe justify the price tag. I've been testing/shooting Digilux 2, Digilux 3, D-Lux 4, D-Lux 5 and X1 and submitting my "user's reflections"; some of them were even incorporated - it applies to many other photogs as well. I think that it's users duty to complain and demand - otherwise we'll be getting cameras designed by office accountants. Troll or not, you decide. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
napawino Posted August 3, 2011 Share #55 Â Posted August 3, 2011 Thinly veiled attempts at trashing a fine camera. Plain and simple. Why don't you let it go? Most of us don't have your "problems" with the X1. You keep comparing apples to oranges. Only one is a citrus fruit. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
phancj Posted August 4, 2011 Share #56 Â Posted August 4, 2011 Why X1 is not the camera it might have been?. Leica engineers are besser-wissers - they ask "real photogs" oppinion and then design something opposite. . lack of proper grip on the body; the add-on is expensive and blocks the battery compartment. . original viewfinder with terrible barrel distortion and lack of central AF point. . switches easily movable and NOT very positive, firm clicks . LCD screen should have been much "better" for the money . coarse shutter speed stops . continuously stopping down aperture (IDIOTIC) . manual exposure not very "convenient", half pressure needed to see the effect of controls (histogram not ver accurate either) - why not copy what every Canon G has: manual exposure controls with live view (wysiwyg) All these, and some other minor "faults", could easily be ommited without any increase in production costs and together with camera's superb sensor and lens could really create totally unique tool - and maybe justify the price tag. I've been testing/shooting Digilux 2, Digilux 3, D-Lux 4, D-Lux 5 and X1 and submitting my "user's reflections"; some of them were even incorporated - it applies to many other photogs as well. I think that it's users duty to complain and demand - otherwise we'll be getting cameras designed by office accountants. Troll or not, you decide. Â Honestly I do not know a single camera without its imperfections. I do not think there is a strict definition for "real photogs" either. Â Here's the thing, I think you may have missed out on the rationale behind this camera. See, I use this camera sans VF, grip, A&A case, etc,etc,etc and just use it with a simple wrist strap which stabilizes the thing for me beautifully. I find its controls the simplest I have ever used. Â I see people modifying this camera which I respect (since to each his own) but the way I see it the draw of this camera is simply the best sensor/lens combo in that small form factor. If leica makes a bigger X2 I'll skip it. If they make it based on the same specs but even smaller I'll buy again. IT's that simple. I use a DSLR when the job requires and do not expect the X1 to be a swiss army knife, a fixed lens camera is a dead-end limited platform anyway. No use comparing the DSLR to the X1, really. Â But as a "real photog" surely you must know that already. Â As a real buyer of the X1 and potential customer of future Xs if they launch any, I say they gotta make it smaller and smaller and if possible bigger and/or better sensor and lens. Any bigger and I'd rather buy the smaller DSLR as you suggested, more flexibility and cheaper. I attribute a large part of the price to portability, maybe it's just me, coz I use the macbook air (whilst many slam it for its limited specs), and have always enjoyed smaller and lighter gear. Could be there I am not a "real photog" like you?? Â If the X1 was indeed designed by accountants then bravo, leica should employ more of them. Â CJ Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluebear Posted August 4, 2011 Share #57  Posted August 4, 2011 In fact the first thing that struck me when I bought the X1 was its intuitive and minimalist controls and simple menu and non-convoluted UI. In canon you have layers and layers of menus and I find that frustrating, apart from buttons all over the place on the camera (ditto nikon but I personally find nikon's button placement more suitable for me). The X1 is IMO a very well thought out camera. Its simplistic menus and buttons make it a real joy to use, other qualities aside. Not so for DSLRs.  CJ  There is a certain simplicity about the handling of the X1 that I love. No video. No "art filters". No scene modes. No complex menus to get lost in. It's a pure, compact camera with an amazing lens and it produces stunning images. As you say elsewhere in this thread CJ, it's not perfect. What is? Part of its charm for me is actually that its not a piece of consumer electronics with a cheap bit of glass on the front.  If one accepts that the X1 is not cheap and if one embraces its quirks rather than trying to fight them, this is one hell of a camera. Some people will always moan about it, in which case they should sell it and move on elsewhere. Their criticism will be duly noted. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest drpix Posted August 4, 2011 Share #58 Â Posted August 4, 2011 Thinly veiled attempts at trashing a fine camera. Plain and simple. Why don't you let it go? Most of us don't have your "problems" with the X1. You keep comparing apples to oranges. Only one is a citrus fruit. Â Either you don't understand or don't want to understand what I'm writing about. I am NOT trashing a fine camera; I am only trying to contribute to "review of X1". I have been using the camera in two years (and still am) and got some "nice results". My point is that, we users, should complain more about obvious and unneccesary "faults". If we don't do it then no manufacturer will care. If you want to see "my problems" with the camera have a look at these links. Leica-camera.dk | LEICA X1 Andrzej i Polen Leica-camera.dk | LEICA X1 Andrzej i Burano Leica-camera.dk | LEICA X1 Andrzej i Venedig Leica-camera.dk | LEICA X1 Andrzej i Bari og Korfu Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
phancj Posted August 4, 2011 Share #59 Â Posted August 4, 2011 Drpix, Â Your comparison of the x1 with dslr/dlux5/canon G is flawed. They are different cameras, with different strengths and weaknesses. Â You have made your point, leica doesnt care despite your feedback during beta testing. Â Question then becomes, what now? Â I doubt leica staff read any of this, really. So your efforts at voicing your complaints to spur them to greater heights will likely yield no result. In fact, if they didnt treasure your input then whilst beta testing what makes you think they do now? Â I do hope canon/nikon or just about anyone makes another large sensor camera with great lens and small size (hopefully cheaper too) but until then I just enjoy the X1. Â CJ Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tom0511 Posted August 4, 2011 Share #60 Â Posted August 4, 2011 Better late than never:) In my "criticism" I only say that camera's ergonomics sucks! Definitely NOT a "tool"; rather an expensive toy. Leica is NOT a holly cow; they make some outstanding lenses but very often their cameras seem like being designed by Porsche egineers but NOT photogrpahers. One reads chants about how great X1 is and very seldom severe ergonomic flaws are brought up (for example - continuous stopping down of the aperture blades which makes exposure assestment virtually impossible). Of course the camera is capable of delivering stunning images (mostly thanks to the lens and sensor) but so are many other cameras for half the price. So wake up Leica lovers: criticise, complain, demand - for the money you have the right to get properly designed "tools" not hybrids consisting of half of jewels and half of rubbish. Â Ergonomics are a lot personal taste. What some hate other may love. IMO the simplicity of many Leicas is unbeaten. I for example much prefer the Leica user interface over that of many 4/3 cameras. You have quick access and overview over f-stop and exp time and manual focus, the menues are easy to understand and quick to access. The only problem I have with the x1 (now) is that lately I dont get along so good with 35mm FOV only. I am not saying its the wholy cow, but the fact that the UI doesnt work for you doesnt mean that its bad/might not work very well for others. Â Comparing it to a DSLR doesntmake sense IMO, because the x1 is much smaller - thats the whole idea about this camera. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.