Jump to content
🇩🇪 Neu: Leica SL3 Reporter ×
🇺🇸🇬🇧 New: Leica SL3 Reporter ×

X1 vs. X2

reginaldwatkins

By reginaldwatkins
in Leica X

Recommended Posts

Hektor6644

Hektor6644

Posted
Posted

Hi:

 

Usually to make a difference in anything the double rule applies. In a sensor, the MP should be twice as many, but since we are talking about a surface are, then it should be 4 times. However, let’s not go that far. I would say the appreciable difference is 2X. In other words, it should be at least 24 MP. On the other hand, larger size pixels are better for less noise and better resolution, except that there is less of them. The ideal would be more pixels of the same size. If given a choice, I prefer the APS-C 12 MP over the 16 MP APS-C sensor.

 

One thing that I rather have for my X1 is an f/2 Elmarit, but the X2 doesn’t have it either. The other thing is the pop-up flash. I’m afraid that my present flash, as reported by many X1 users, might not collapse due to malfunction after my warranty period is over. There is no way to turn the flash off if that happens. Besides that, I do not miss an EVF. I got used with the Leica OVF and no longer need to see the numbers or focus points. Actually, the X1 is the only camera I can use with my bifocals.

 

Thanks,

 

Hektor

Link to post
Share on other sites
efftee

efftee

Posted
Posted

A few megapixels more or less isn't a big deal to me. I was underwhelmed with the X1 2 years ago and, from what I have read and seen so far, I'll probably be underwhelmed with the X2 -- can't say for sure until I have test-driven it in person.

 

The quicker AF is welcome but like what Reid posted in his review, it isn't the 'hybird-AF' that would make a marked difference. It would have been great if the AA filter had gone, or at least tuned down significantly. And a f/2 Cron would have been godsend. As it is, not sure if I should settle for this, wait another 2 years for an X3 or get the A12-28mm for my GXR.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Ivan Muller

Ivan Muller

Posted
Posted

Hector, the way to get round the pop up flash that doesn't want to retract is to shoot at the continuous setting...that setting disables the flash and then you can carry on shooting in 'overdrive' mode..:) more worrying is that my sensor is like a dust magnet....:mad:

Link to post
Share on other sites
robert blu

robert blu

Posted
Posted

As satisfied user of the x1 I sometimes miss a 50mm (equivalent) lens and more megapixel would allow more cropping possibilities just in case. A part of this I do not print so larger than A3+ and tha actual sensor is ok for me.

robert

Link to post
Share on other sites
dave.gt

dave.gt

Posted
Posted

Advertisement (gone after registration)

IMO, it took a couple of days to realize that the X2 is really pretty well set up. The X1 (on loan) has been giving me amazing images and is a joy to use as I continue to bond with the camera.

 

On revisit, I was disappointed at first about the lens not changing but the ISO has gone up to 12,500 which more than makes up for that problem!

 

Secondly, I was disappointed that an expensive EVF was in the mix but at $575 or so, I don't need it and just use an older VF that fits on my IIIF as well. I am happy because the physical size of the X1 and X2 are for all purposes, the same, small enough to fit in my pocket.

 

The third thing I was disappointed about at first was the rumor that the price went up...not true. At B&H, the X2 can be purchased for the same $1995. Cool.

 

Add in the huge increase in memory, a better flash, faster AF, faster burst rate and a few more improvements, I would be happy to have an X2 alongside an X1. Very happy.:)

 

I now have a wonderful companion(s) for my IIIF!

Link to post
Share on other sites
dave.gt

dave.gt

Posted
Posted

I am awaiting for the really good images to be posted from using the X2. Flickriver has a huge number of excellent images from the X1 as does the LUF gallery. With more resolution, I reckon, I won't be disappointed.:)

 

Images like Andy's horse race just confirm that one can get fantastic images like his with just a little work (or in my case, probably a whole lot of work).

Link to post
Share on other sites
Feudal1

Feudal1

Posted
Posted
IMO, it took a couple of days to realize that the X2 is really pretty well set up. The X1 (on loan) has been giving me amazing images and is a joy to use as I continue to bond with the camera.

 

On revisit, I was disappointed at first about the lens not changing but the ISO has gone up to 12,500 which more than makes up for that problem!

 

Secondly, I was disappointed that an expensive EVF was in the mix but at $575 or so, I don't need it and just use an older VF that fits on my IIIF as well. I am happy because the physical size of the X1 and X2 are for all purposes, the same, small enough to fit in my pocket.

 

The third thing I was disappointed about at first was the rumor that the price went up...not true. At B&H, the X2 can be purchased for the same $1995. Cool.

 

Add in the huge increase in memory, a better flash, faster AF, faster burst rate and a few more improvements, I would be happy to have an X2 alongside an X1. Very happy.:)

 

I now have a wonderful companion(s) for my IIIF!

 

This is how I feel. I think the X2 will be a fine camera. It's not a cheap camera, and the low resolution LCD screen is disappointing, but it's Leica - you know what you're getting. The sensor should be improved over the X1, the low light performance should be better, and the AF should be a lot better. I know a lot of people like the X100, but I always thought the X1 colors were nicer, and the images sharper at equivalent apertures. Additionally, the X1 may have had some QC issues, but the X100 sticky blade issue seems pretty prevalent. I have the X2 on pre-order, and am looking forward to it becoming available. Not sure when that will be, but hopefully before the end of the month.

Link to post
Share on other sites
warnica

warnica

Posted
Posted
This is how I feel. I think the X2 will be a fine camera. It's not a cheap camera, and the low resolution LCD screen is disappointing, but it's Leica - you know what you're getting. The sensor should be improved over the X1, the low light performance should be better, and the AF should be a lot better. I know a lot of people like the X100, but I always thought the X1 colors were nicer, and the images sharper at equivalent apertures. Additionally, the X1 may have had some QC issues, but the X100 sticky blade issue seems pretty prevalent. I have the X2 on pre-order, and am looking forward to it becoming available. Not sure when that will be, but hopefully before the end of the month.

 

X2

Link to post
Share on other sites
dave.gt

dave.gt

Posted
Posted
What are your thoughts on more megapixels on the same size sensor? I'm not impressed, I need a bigger sensor with more megapixels. Please let me know your thoughts...

 

My two cents worth is the bigger the sensor the higher the IQ...

 

Hey, Reginald,

 

Would you be located in Sandy Springs, Georgia?:)

Link to post
Share on other sites
tnturnerx1

tnturnerx1

Posted
Posted

Regarding megapixel, I'm waiting for reviews to evaluate. 16, in my opinion, will degrade the quality of the pixels. In general, I'm very disappointed in the X2 specs. X1 needs a new, higher quality lens. Current lens too much chromatic abbération. I don't expect a $4,000 lens on a $2,000 camera but I'd pay $3000 for X3 with better lens. And I will not ever buy Xn upgrade with that crummy LCD.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Paul J

Paul J

Posted
Posted

I own the X1. The quality is ridiculously good.

 

I think the extra MP regardless of size chip is going to be good. The faster focus is the biggest thing and is the only thing I would change about the X1.

 

I won't be rushing to upgrade as I'm perfectly happy with my x1 but I will at some point. It's a solid upgrade to an already near perfect camera, IMO oc.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Krauthead

Krauthead

Posted
Posted

No need to change here because the X1 is incredible.

 

It does take a good bit of time to learn how to get the best images from this camera. The AF is too slow, so part of my regime is to always have it set to f 5.6 or above. This offers the necessary depth of field to always be in focus.

 

Lens is incredible, so I just don't know what people are talking about when they diss it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
dave.gt

dave.gt

Posted
Posted

Nothing wrong with the amazing lens! It is a fabulous lens and the IQ it renders is far better than anything else in compact cameras.

 

CA? Not a problem with the reviews I have read including dpreview. Not a problem with me.

 

The X2 will be an excellent compact camera just as the X1 has been and continues to be.:)

Link to post
Share on other sites
nickma

nickma

Posted
Posted

I don't have a CA problem.

 

No flare, no ghosting, a nice, realistic effect on night time lighting at f2.8.

 

Excellent lens of a similar quality to top Canon glass I'd suggest.

 

Just a touch of purple fringing on trees, sometimes, that drops out through Efex Pro 2 post-processing.

Link to post
Share on other sites
NZDavid

NZDavid

Posted
Posted

Looks like a nice camera. I traded my X1 towards an M9 but still miss the compact size. X1 IQ is already excellent. Little D-Lux 5 is a great compact but IQ not at the same level. High ISO performance was very good with the X1. Larger sensor size of the X2 is not a dealmaker for me, but it's nice to have (like extra ccs in a car). Faster AF is a big plus. 35 is surprisingly versatile but I'd still like other focal lengths, an ultra wide and a medium tele.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...