nickma Posted January 16, 2012 Share #41 Posted January 16, 2012 Advertisement (gone after registration) I think Leica will make a similar camera to the X100 but with interchangeable lens, so the X100 will become the camera that everyone wishes had processing speed, decent manual focus and interchangeable lenses. Where as the X1 will still be highly portable and super IQ whilst not even entering into the rangefinder fray. The X1 also has a viewfinder, albeit as an extra which as I tried to show can be just as useful once you know the camera well enough to not need electronic feedback from it. I have yet to see images that prove the X100 doesn't loose out to the X1 on IQ, how is it on white balance? and it's certainly still too big in comparison. Anyway, we keep rehashing the subject but this is a Leica forum so you can expect a bit of a struggle promoting your love for an alternative Fuji product. So you think Leica will make a similar camera to Fuji's just released X Pro 1? Essentially an AF-centric, scaled down, smaller sensor M9 in other words? Have to say, I love my X1, but the X Pro 1 looks the absolute 'business'. Would I change over given the body plus one of the interchangeable lens is the same price as an X1? Depending on ease of use and of course iQ, I might well do! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted January 16, 2012 Posted January 16, 2012 Hi nickma, Take a look here X1 sold, X100 bought.... I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
Nevin Nevin Posted January 16, 2012 Share #42 Posted January 16, 2012 So you think Leica will make a similar camera to Fuji's just released X Pro 1? I think so. Maybe I can write about the cues in my next blog post and share the contents here. Let me see if I can dig out the materials. Nevin Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr_Jones Posted January 16, 2012 Share #43 Posted January 16, 2012 So you think Leica will make a similar camera to Fuji's just released X Pro 1? Essentially an AF-centric, scaled down, smaller sensor M9 in other words? Have to say, I love my X1, but the X Pro 1 looks the absolute 'business'. Would I change over given the body plus one of the interchangeable lens is the same price as an X1? Depending on ease of use and of course iQ, I might well do! There has been an announcement to this end from the Leica MD, I think it's been reported on this forum. No specs but I'm guessing they felt the need to say they are announcing something of that sort at Photokina. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
nickma Posted January 16, 2012 Share #44 Posted January 16, 2012 How interesting; maybe Fuji's aim was to announce and get stock into market first, though I imagine price points will be very different. It makes me wonder where that leaves the X100, albeit 70% of the price. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nevin Nevin Posted January 17, 2012 Share #45 Posted January 17, 2012 I think so. Maybe I can write about the cues in my next blog post and share the contents here. Let me see if I can dig out the materials. ------- I just wrote the following blog post in response to what I mentioned yesterday. Or has the news been already reported here? Anyway, here it goes: The X Pro 1 is making lots of photographers ticklish, and people are speculating on Leica’s answer to it. For that matter, an interview with Leica CEO in September 2011 can shed light on this pent-up demand for an answer. The interview articles reveals a few cues: 1) Leica will probably offer a ILC-like camera to fill the line-up and pricing gap between the X1 and the M to mark its centennial celebration which is in 2013 2) That bridging camera is not expected to have a diminutive body but will have an EVF. 3) The features will be in line with Leica’s philosophy: not too flowery to upstage simplicity in design and functions 4) The sensor type is still to be decided (Considering that the reporter probably has no good knowledge in camera because she keeps relating MFT to Sony, Canon and Nikon ILCs, as well as the business cooperation between Leica and Panasonic, my guesstimate is that Schopf’s was a polite reply. But it can also hint that the MFT sensor will be a choice if the larger APS-C under consideration doesn’t prove better and more cost effective. As a side note, obviously, it doesn't take rocket science to figure out what the CEO means about smart phones and cameras: first, they are never the same even though in some cases the latter like the X1 doesn’t have an integrated VF; second, we now know the answer for sure as per the perpetual myth of what differs an image from a photo -- "If you look at the picture quality, it’s different. You can shoot images with such devices (phones), but (they are) not photos” Very humourously well-said indeed. The full interview article is as follows: Singapore’s My Paper (English) SOPHIE HONG 2011-09-16 Phone cameras not a threat, says Leica CEO MOBILE-PHONE manufacturers are increasingly equipping their handsets with higher-megapixel cameras these days. The trend has led some to wonder if the traditional camera would go the way of the dodo bird. However, in the eyes of Mr Alfred Schopf, the global chief executive of Leica Camera, that is not an issue at all. Here’s why: The sensor of a traditional camera is more powerful than that of a cellphone camera. “Currently, the cameras on mobile phones have very small sensors, due to the space limit. The smaller the sensor, the lesser the depth of field in your photographs,” he told my paper on Monday in an exclusive interview. Mr Schopf was in town to visit Leica’s office here. “If you look at the picture quality, it’s different. You can shoot images with such devices, but (they are) not photos,” he said. That is why high-end brands in the market, including Leica, do not feel threatened by the emergence of cellphone cameras, he added. For Leica, which will celebrate its 100th anniversary in 2013, worldwide sales in the first quarter of its fiscal year have gone up by 28.7 per cent. The German firm’s interim report also noted that camera sales in the Asian region have seen a rise of over 30 per cent. Of late, camera manufacturers have been racing to come up with mirrorless cameras with interchangeable lenses. Also known as Micro Four Thirds cameras, these devices are close to digital single-lens reflex, or DSLR, cameras in performance but come in much smaller sizes – one factor that has made the Micro Four Thirds system a hit in the mass-consumer market. Earlier this month, Bloomberg reported that Sony’s market share in Japan has doubled after its foray into the Micro Four Thirds market with the Sony Nex series. In contrast, the combined Japan market share of the world’s two biggest high-end camera makers, Canon and Nikon, which have not unveiled any Micro Four Thirds camera, has dropped by 35 per cent. When asked if Leica would be launching its own line of Micro Four Thirds cameras, Mr Schopf said that the brand already has the Leica X1, a compact camera, and the M-System, which has interchangeable lenses but not an electronic viewfinder. “We are at the borderline of compact-system cameras already, with the Leica X1 and Leica M-System, and it’s pretty obvious that, at one point, we are going to offer something in between,” said Mr Schopf. “But we have to look very carefully into what sensor parts we are using and what features we are offering.” On Micro Four Thirds devices, Mr Schopf said: “They have compact bodies and huge lenses in front. I feel a little bit stressed by that design, to be honest.” It may take a bit more time to see a Leica Micro Four Thirds camera on the market, but Mr Schopf reassured fans of the brand that this is to ensure that high standards are maintained. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lasagnerd Posted February 5, 2012 Share #46 Posted February 5, 2012 did opposite. I exchanged my x100 for x1 as the former has sticky aperture problem. x100 is a good camera, though the building quality is not that good. lots of the problems. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tom0511 Posted February 6, 2012 Share #47 Posted February 6, 2012 Advertisement (gone after registration) Here is my opinion: While focusing slow the x1 is the mirrorless camera with the smalles AF-point (Spot-focus) and the most accurate of the ones I tried (G1,GH2,G3,EP-2,NEX). While I am overall a viewfinder guy I enjoy shooting cameras like this WITHOUT viewfinder quite offen. a) for different perspective because I dont have the camera between my face and the subject. I have a OVF for my x1 but mostly leave it at home because when I use the x1 I want a compact camera. The one area where I have problems with the display is in bright sunlight. With the x1 you have the option to put the viewfinder off and on, depending on your needs. My biggest problem with the x1 is the fixed focal length. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hektor6644 Posted March 5, 2012 Share #48 Posted March 5, 2012 Hello friends, sorry, but I have sold my x1. The picture quality was perfect but the camera felt very "plastic" to me. I loved the design, but the feeling was not what I expected. When the build in flash did not stay in, it reached for me the bottomline. Now I bought the Fuji x100. And finally I get the feeling back from my good old M4. What a great camera, the x100 is. With the two separate vieuwfinders possibility. With a silence button for instant silence fotowork. At last I've got a "real" camera in my hands. With a lot of professional options. I will keep you informed. Hi: I agree with you that the X100 might be a better and more fun camera than my beloved X1, but it is not a Leica - the only reason I bought such a compact camera. All my life I wanted a Leica and the X1 is the only Leica I can afford (the M9 + 4 lenses ~ $21,000 / I also have the D700 and D7000.) Best regards, Hektor Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tbutt Posted March 5, 2012 Share #49 Posted March 5, 2012 Hello friends, sorry, but I have sold my x1. The picture quality was perfect but the camera felt very "plastic" to me. I loved the design, but the feeling was not what I expected. You judge a camera by its feeling? Sorry - can't follow... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lars_bergquist Posted March 9, 2012 Share #50 Posted March 9, 2012 The market for small-sensor compact cameras is withering. I have heard from credible people in the business that sales dropped by some 40% during 2011. I think MFT cameras too will soon be endangered. This anecdote is from the same source: A fellow here in Sweden went for a holiday in Sicily and on the day he stepped off the plane, his camera (not a Leica) died. But he had an iPhone and used that instead. He went to my spokesman's shop for prints and got 13x18s of them all. There were of course some situations the phone did not master, but eight out of ten of the prints were just fine. Not M9, but fine for a holidaymaker. And convenience is part of the tale: You carry one item, not two, and that one is one you always carry. Case closed. In the future, only people serious about photography will carry a camera. So the new Leica will not be a MFT camera. I would say so in any case, but I have a better source: Herr Andreas Kaufmann Himself has said, and been quoted in print in the LFI, that the new camera will have "at least" an APS-C sensor. LB Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wda Posted March 9, 2012 Share #51 Posted March 9, 2012 did opposite. I exchanged my x100 for x1 as the former has sticky aperture problem. x100 is a good camera, though the building quality is not that good. lots of the problems. And depreciates much faster than its Leica rivals! At Focus this week, I saw the X100 new on offer for about 60% of its launch price one year ago. While the X1 is now packaged with the VF and case, it does seem to hold its value rather better. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
nickma Posted March 9, 2012 Share #52 Posted March 9, 2012 Agreed David. I had an X100 last year briefly. I bought it for £799 and sold it for the same amount. It was already quite heavily discounted, with Amazon pricing at £764 for the X100 since before Xmas, and today is down to £703. You don't see those discounts on X1s, other than the packaged viewfinder and case at around £1400. I guess they make a lot less of them. I like the fact that the X1 is less adulterated. What do I mean by that? : Compare the in camera jpeg processing on the X100 that corrects lens design compromises, versus the RAW files. Then do the same on a Leica X1. There is no obvious difference between jpeg and RAW files on the Leica in terms of distortion, edge sharpness etc. (ignore the big differences in terms of light and depth). It says the lens has started out life as an exceptionally fine design. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
HV25 Posted March 27, 2012 Share #53 Posted March 27, 2012 Going back to the original post ... and being perfectly honest ... I have no idea what kind of 'plastic' sensation a X 1 could trigger. Yes it is a special camera, yes its not for everybody (that actually should become clear to everyone before buying one) ... but no ... its definitely not 'plastic'. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Archiver Posted April 3, 2012 Share #54 Posted April 3, 2012 I must admit that I took the X1 back to the shop one day after I bought it, and exchanged it for a X100. And the X100 makes me much more happy. The X1 makes an irritating noise with its chattering aperture, constantly changing to meet exposure. No other camera does this, except, ironically, for the Fuji X-Pro 1. The startup time is annoying slow, the top dials are very loose, and the image quality was just not what I was expecting. As I have a range of other cameras including the Ricoh GXR, I was hoping that the X1 would be at least the equal of the GXR's aps-c modules, but it is not. Even the shutter sound wasn't the whisper-quiet click that others have reported; it is just as loud as the Ricoh GXR, perhaps more noticeable. There were other design quirks which either confounded or annoyed me, and I was simply not happy. The X100 is better in just about every way apart from wide-open sharpness and pocketability. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
nickma Posted April 3, 2012 Share #55 Posted April 3, 2012 Wow, now that's a surprise, as it's unquestionably far better RAW IQ than the X100 I had. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Archiver Posted April 4, 2012 Share #56 Posted April 4, 2012 Wow, now that's a surprise, as it's unquestionably far better RAW IQ than the X100 I had. Yes, it surprised me a lot, too. When I first got the X1, I did a series of direct raw comparisons with the Ricoh GXR aps-c modules, including the 50mm, 28mm and M-mount. In every instance, the Ricoh modules retained more detail, were just as sharp and sometimes sharper, and I liked the colour rendition more. It was perplexing and disappointing. The overall 'look' of the images, though, was still excellent. But as the Ricoh modules were just as good and often better, there was no need for the X1. If the X1 had been more quiet, focused faster, and had better image quality than the Ricoh modules I would have kept it. As it was, the X1 was redundant to my other gear. As for the X100's image quality: the X100's lens is very soft wide open, especially when shooting close up and macro distances. At f2, X100 macros look like they were taken through a ghostly white veil. The X1 is much, much better wide open. But the gap closes considerably by f2.8 on the X100, and I believe the difference is negligible, if any, by f4. The X1's bokeh is softer and more pleasing but this mostly shows in only some circumstances. The X100 has some lens distortion at the corners, where the X1 has none, but I found the difference there to be negligible in most situations. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
phancj Posted April 4, 2012 Share #57 Posted April 4, 2012 Strange our experience is different. The X1 is much more quiet than the gxr I tried and image quality though subjective I very much prefer what comes out of the X1. I wanted to get a gxr but decided against it also because I found the whole operational aspects "clunky" and just not as quick and simple as the X1. Just got a Nikon D800, hell of a fun camera by virtue of its resolution, woith my 35mm 1.4G and 85 1.4G the thing really flies haha... Shooting this weekend but guess what the X1 goes out coz its small and the 35mm will do. X1 will stay in my arsenal for good till it dies CJ Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
anupmc Posted April 4, 2012 Share #58 Posted April 4, 2012 I must admit that I took the X1 back to the shop one day after I bought it, and exchanged it for a X100..... Hmmm... just one day of use of the X1 and you decided it's not for you, thats fine, your prerogative of course... But I don't quite get what you're doing in the X1 forum posting paragraph after paragraph... wondering what you're missing or what? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
budhudson Posted April 4, 2012 Share #59 Posted April 4, 2012 I agree with the last post It is impossible (for me anyway) to have made up my mind about the X1 in just 1 day Unless you are very lucky and find every shooting scenario with the potential to try every possible setting at each of them then i can't see how you can come to this conclusion? I have had mine over a year now and am still enjoying learning. Its great fun to do it and i am getting better but 1 day and that's it? Ah well - each to their own Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wda Posted April 4, 2012 Share #60 Posted April 4, 2012 No matter what skill level, there is always a learning curve with a new camera. One day suggests either a brilliant analyst or a hasty judgement. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.