akiralx Posted May 17, 2012 Share #1 Posted May 17, 2012 Advertisement (gone after registration) I've shot an M9 for a couple of years and like it a lot for its simplicity - which is the one thing that draws me to the X2 for a travel/smaller camera. Two simple dials on the top plate, sounds ideal. Anyone else shoot an X1 as well as a digital M? One thing that interests me is the high ISO performance, which I've read is superior to the M9. Often I find the 35 Summilux FLE at some events still ends up giving ISO 2500 and 1/8th sec, so I sigh and put the camera away - which is a shame. Will the X2's high ISO performance be two stops better, that the f/2.8 lens will require? Maybe so. And I will always have the flash... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted May 17, 2012 Posted May 17, 2012 Hi akiralx, Take a look here M9 + X2?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
Aperture 2 Posted May 17, 2012 Share #2 Posted May 17, 2012 I use an M9 and a X1, for me they are perfectly complementary. The X1 can come with me to places the M9 cannot without been akwwards. For example the X1 can be used on business trips without anyone notice it. In the pocket if you do not need it, in your hand if you see a nice picture... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fotograph Posted May 17, 2012 Share #3 Posted May 17, 2012 I use an M9 and a X1, for me they are perfectly complementary.The X1 can come with me to places the M9 cannot without been akwwards. For example the X1 can be used on business trips without anyone notice it. In the pocket if you do not need it, in your hand if you see a nice picture... Why should the M9 be awkward? Too expensive? too "slow" for just a snapshot? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bruniroquai Posted May 17, 2012 Share #4 Posted May 17, 2012 The perfect companion Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
richam Posted May 18, 2012 Share #5 Posted May 18, 2012 A perfect combo in my opinion. My kit for a 2 week photo "safari" to the Maginot line and World War II sites: M9 with 18mm SEM, 28mm Elm, 50mm Lux, 75mm Summarit, plus X1. The X1 provides 36mm field of view to complement the M9 plus back it up in case of failure. I expect most of the shots will be M9/50mm or M9/28mm. The 18mm is useful for a few tight interiors, and the 75 is useful for making multiple image elements seem closer than they actually are. Low light situations are covered nicely with the M9/50 and X1. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wda Posted May 18, 2012 Share #6 Posted May 18, 2012 I've shot an M9 for a couple of years and like it a lot for its simplicity - which is the one thing that draws me to the X2 for a travel/smaller camera. Two simple dials on the top plate, sounds ideal. Anyone else shoot an X1 as well as a digital M?.... Frequently! Choose the right lens companions for your M9. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
budhudson Posted May 18, 2012 Share #7 Posted May 18, 2012 Advertisement (gone after registration) I am about to be another X & M user Had a play with an M9 today with a 50mm lens It will be coming my way in the next week or so to compliment my X1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
brill64 Posted May 19, 2012 Share #8 Posted May 19, 2012 Why should the M9 be awkward? Too expensive? too "slow" for just a snapshot? good point & although difficult to put into words precisely why, i find the m9 & x1 are complimentary. i use both so i'm spoilt for choice but for me sometimes it's occasionally the act of bringing out a small, light & auto-everything camera initially breaks the ice a bit before bringing out even an (small) even more versatile m9. at other times i want to carry something small in a pocket or waist belt on the street at night or as recently, with me in a canoe (in a ziplok bag) or beneath a waterfall & yet still manage to take home some outstanding files. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul J Posted May 19, 2012 Share #9 Posted May 19, 2012 I have both and think they work well together. The high ISO is very good. The X1 offers even more portability and it's size and quality is incredible. I would definitely go for the X2 if I was to buy now as the faster operation would be a great thing. The AF of the X1 is the only limiting factor I think. You learn to get around it though. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aperture 2 Posted May 21, 2012 Share #10 Posted May 21, 2012 Why should the M9 be awkward? Too expensive? too "slow" for just a snapshot? Maybe my english is not correct when I say "ackward", I just cannot always have a camera (any camera) hanging around my neck at work or in some other social situations - the X1 pocket size is then what I need. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NZDavid Posted May 21, 2012 Share #11 Posted May 21, 2012 I think longterm the X2 and M9 could merge! X2 + M9 = ? Imagine an X camera with interchangeable lenses, plus accessory EVF, OVF, and rangefinder. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
richam Posted May 26, 2012 Share #12 Posted May 26, 2012 An afterthought. Since many of us carry the M9 and X1, wouldn't it be nice to have the controls work nearly the same on both? Leica could start by putting the functions on the X1 up-down-right-left buttons into the main menu. The M9 hold and spin ISO is also nice. And the M9 on/off bracketing is easier than the X1 EV selection every time. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul J Posted May 27, 2012 Share #13 Posted May 27, 2012 An afterthought. Since many of us carry the M9 and X1, wouldn't it be nice to have the controls work nearly the same on both? Leica could start by putting the functions on the X1 up-down-right-left buttons into the main menu. The M9 hold and spin ISO is also nice. And the M9 on/off bracketing is easier than the X1 EV selection every time. I agree. Exposure compensation should be M9 like also. Would be good if you could just turn that jog wheel on the back to activate it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
budhudson Posted May 29, 2012 Share #14 Posted May 29, 2012 Update from post #7 I now have the M9 to partner my X1 Steel grey one with a nice 50mm F2.5 Summarit to get me going (for now) So far so good Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mah Posted July 9, 2012 Share #15 Posted July 9, 2012 Here are two shots using M9 and X2: M9+ 35mm Summilux: The City- M9 version | Flickr - Photo Sharing! X2: The City- X2 version | Flickr - Photo Sharing! Thanks Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AJB Posted July 9, 2012 Share #16 Posted July 9, 2012 Interesting comparison. The X2 image is slightly better rendered to my untutored eye. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
threeputt Posted July 9, 2012 Share #17 Posted July 9, 2012 Interesting comparison. The X2 image is slightly better rendered to my untutored eye. Mine too. The colors look better to me, but then again I like rich colors. That "saturation" slider is hard for me to leave alone. Jeff Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wda Posted July 9, 2012 Share #18 Posted July 9, 2012 Judging by comparing the top of the Gherkin, the M9 has a clear edge. This is not surprising, being full frame. I use the X1 (same lens) with my M9 confidently and with equally good results. They are regular companions where the 36mm lens is an alternate for a wider or longer lens on the M9 For critical work, however, I would choose the M9 every time. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stark60 Posted July 9, 2012 Share #19 Posted July 9, 2012 It would have been interesting to have the M9 picture at ISO100. In any case for me the M9 picture looks better than the X2 : besides the sharpness, if you take a small surface you see a bigger variety of colors. Isn’t it normal considering the price difference ? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AJB Posted July 9, 2012 Share #20 Posted July 9, 2012 The reason I referred to rendering rather than sharpness is the M9 has some odd colour rendering in places, not least on the NatWest tower. Expanding up comparable areas on both pictures does not to me reveal a massively sharper or more detailed M9 advantage. When price is brought into the picture the diminishing returns from the M9 (on this very limited and not necessarily representative sample) appear stark. I would like to see some other representative comparisons, purely for interest as I must admit I am currently coveting a used M9. AJ Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.