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

Help jumping in...used X1, new X2, other??

leicarox

By leicarox
in Leica X

Recommended Posts

leicarox

leicarox

Posted
Posted

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Newbie needing advice here.. :-)

 

I'm trying to choose something to jump in with...

 

X1 demo w/full warranty - $1500

X2 - $2000

Ricoh GXR + M-Mount + lens - $2500+

Used M8 + lens - $3500+

 

Any/all advice welcome!

(BTW, Leaning towards the X1 for some reason)

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 79
  • Created
  • Last Reply
Ecaton

Ecaton

Posted
Posted

X1. I have not seen any convincing files from the X2. To the contrary, the files from the X1 look better to me. Maybe its the stronger AA filter in the X2, maybe the fact that not too many X2 are in the hands of real users yet.

The Ricoh GXR M produces excellent files and for the price of an X2 with EVF you can buy it plus about 2-3 CV lenses. CV15, CV 28, CV50 would make a nice set up.

Link to post
Share on other sites
efftee

efftee

Posted
Posted

X1, X2 are different cameras from the M8. And if you are planning on using the GXR with M lenses, then they're more likely in the same basket as an M8 than either X1 or X2.

 

So, between the X1 and X2, if $ and IQ are priority, go for the X1 (prices may dip even more when the X2 become freely available and you get more or less the same image). If AF speed, build (better flash mechanism), EVF function and slightly larger images are priority, get the X2.

 

Between the M8 and GXR. If $ is a concern, get the GXR. Otherwise, no brainer. M8 wins whichever way you look at it.

 

If you could only buy one camera, consider the GXR. It's not a bad camera -- small/compact, well-built and you can use it M lenses and its lenses are pretty good.

 

Have fun choosing! ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites
richam

richam

Posted
Posted

I had a chance to compare my X1 to a new X2 at a dealer. I'll stick with the X1 for now. Observations:

Autofocus: X2 is faster, but marginally so for normal shooting. Checked this side by side on the same subjects.

Resolution: X2 has more pixels, again of marginal utility.

ISO: X2 max is 10,000; X1 is 3,200. More marginal utility.

Flash: Don't really understand the logic of moving from the X1 pop up to the X2 "Rube Goldberg" flash. The latter seems to have flimsy parts that are more likely to break. The X1 flash pops up occasionally, like when removing from a bag, but it's not a serious problem.

Shutter/aperture dials: Too easily bumped out of place on the X1; the problem has been solved on the X2 with stiffer dials. Nice, and I'd like to have my X1 upgraded to the new dial mechanism if it ever becomes possible.

 

Save your money and go for the X1.

Link to post
Share on other sites
nickma

nickma

Posted
Posted

I get the feeling that any spec based improvements over the X1 are due entirely to the new sensor used. In other words, other than a different flash contraption and electronic contacts for the fugly EVF, it's exactly the same camera made from the same parts bin, with a slightly different sensor spec and performance.

Link to post
Share on other sites
wda

wda

Posted
Posted

Leicarox, welcome!

 

Advice would be more focused if you told us the purpose of your purchase. Adding the M8 into the equation muddies the water rather. It could be the best solution, but it depends on what you intend to shoot in the future.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Feudal1

Feudal1

Posted
Posted

You might also consider the Fuji X100 as well. Performance and image quality is similar to the X1/X2. Myself, I have the X2 on order, but have been going back and forth on whether to proceed with that, or instead, get the X100 (saving some cash in the process).

 

Personally, I was willing to look past the fact that Leica didn't update the LCD screen to higher resolution, and didn't update the lens to f/2. However, the limited set of images I have seen posted from the X2 seem to be softer than what I have seen from the X1. It could be that the new sensor requires more sharpening than the X1 sensor, but it is troubling. If image quality is your prime motivator, carefully consider whether or not the X2 has taken a step backwards with the new 16mp sensor, and if this is the case, the X1 (or X100) may be the better way to go.

 

In the end, I think they're all good choices, but if you can, you might want to wait to see more reviews and images from the X2 before making a final decision.

Link to post
Share on other sites
leicarox

leicarox

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Thanks for all the feedback everyone!

 

Ecaton:

That was my thought too! The X1 images seemed to be sharper and had more magic or life to them. The X2 seemed to be a bit too soft, or felt like it was out of focus.

 

The GXR is still very much on the radar, and I may end up getting one for my wife anyway with the P1 (she wants "simple" and "zoom") That's a different thread though LOL

I don't know much about the CV or Zeoss M lenses. I have this "idea" that I want a leica lens, but maybe that is not well founded.

 

efftee:

Well, $ is definitely a concern stepping into this--I do want to make the right choices early on if I can. I somewhat feel like I don't quite know enough yet as to pick the right glass. The lenses I'm looking at are not on the cheap side and it probably only makes sense to get one right now (28 elmarit, 35 summarit, or used summicron maybe, this decision feels daunting) Maybe I can't go wrong with any of them?

I do like the 1.3 crop factor of the M8.

 

nickma:

I'm not seeing $1000 X1's. (maybe I'm not looking at the right sites?). I was thinking the demo model from my local dealer because of the full warranty, there for questions, etc. but $1000 does sound better :-)

 

wda:

Thanks, and glad to be here! I've been pondering an M8 for several years actually, just have had different priorities come up. Now we have a family China trip that's coming up that's really prodding me to just "go ahead and go for it." I'm a sucker for image quality (even if I don't have a great photographic/compositional eye yet) from my past work. Chromatic aberration, all that stuff drives me nuts typically. I'm interested in street photography, nature, candid snapshots, etc. Haven't really honed in on any one particular style, but definitely want to get going and up to speed before China, as I'm sure that will be a photographic wonderland for us.

 

Feudal1:

Yes, I've pondered the X100 and played with it a few minutes the other day. The build quality is nice and I like the viewfinder. It was definitely a bit heavier than the X1. I think it does have more going for it, but how is it compared to the X1 on pure image quality?

 

I checked out Steve Huff's X1 vs X100 sample photos and the X100 definitely seems sharper, but it almost looks like the X100 images have sharpening applied? In many places you can see some crazy aliasing/stair stepping going on. Curious about this.

 

I did like the greens from the X1 better. More yellow to them. Not sure if it's more accurate or not, just noticed it was more pleasing to me LOL

Link to post
Share on other sites
Feudal1

Feudal1

Posted
Posted
Thanks for all the feedback everyone!

Yes, I've pondered the X100 and played with it a few minutes the other day. The build quality is nice and I like the viewfinder. It was definitely a bit heavier than the X1. I think it does have more going for it, but how is it compared to the X1 on pure image quality?

 

I checked out Steve Huff's X1 vs X100 sample photos and the X100 definitely seems sharper, but it almost looks like the X100 images have sharpening applied? In many places you can see some crazy aliasing/stair stepping going on. Curious about this.

 

I did like the greens from the X1 better. More yellow to them. Not sure if it's more accurate or not, just noticed it was more pleasing to me LOL

 

When I viewed the X100 images at full size, I felt the same, that they had additional sharpening applied, and were actually over-sharpened.

Link to post
Share on other sites
leicarox

leicarox

Posted
  • Author
Posted

I guess I'll post one more thing :)

 

My thought on the X1 was:

 

"I am going to want a good 35mm lens anyway, and I can get the whole camera for the price of a elmarit lens. Then...when I know more about everything, make a better educated decision on lenses."

 

Is the 2.8 lens in the X1 pretty much the same quality as a normal M lens?

Link to post
Share on other sites
leicarox

leicarox

Posted
  • Author
Posted
When I viewed the X100 images at full size, I felt the same, that they had additional sharpening applied, and were actually over-sharpened.

 

Just found another comparison test on leica rumors--can't tell if the AA is applied to those too, but the images are sharper on the X100.

 

The greens and colors of the Leica look better to me. :-)

Link to post
Share on other sites
Holgersen

Holgersen

Posted
Posted

I had the opportunity to have a look at the new x2 and I tested the LCD. Allthough it still has only 230.000 pixels just like my x1 it is more clear and crisp. I think it is ok now. I have no complaint about it.

I also tested the electronic viewfinder which is good (though bulky and ugly in my opinion).It is easy to use while wearing glasses.You can see the whole frame with glasses.

(On my x1 I use the Leica SBLOO viewfinder which looks beautiful on the camera and gives a larger image than the EVF, but is less convenient to use with glasses).

Link to post
Share on other sites
wda

wda

Posted
Posted
I guess I'll post one more thing :)...

Is the 2.8 lens in the X1 pretty much the same quality as a normal M lens?

Yes it is. Variations in performance are caused by relative sensor sizes but, for practical purposes, the Elmarit on my X1 matches my 28 Elmarit on my M8 (35mm equivalent). Elmarits are excellent lenses at most normal working apertures. However I often use mine wide open.

Link to post
Share on other sites
budhudson

budhudson

Posted
Posted

Hello there and welcome

 

Just for your info i have an X1 and an M9

 

I compared the X1 to the X2 and i am keeping the X1

 

I use the X1 about 65% of the time and the M9 the remaining 35%

 

Portability, consistency and ease make the X1 the reasoning to the above split

 

Now replace my M9 with your proposed M8 and maybe this helps?

 

Good luck in whatever you choose to do

 

Mark

Link to post
Share on other sites
Feudal1

Feudal1

Posted
Posted
I had the opportunity to have a look at the new x2 and I tested the LCD. Allthough it still has only 230.000 pixels just like my x1 it is more clear and crisp. I think it is ok now. I have no complaint about it.

I also tested the electronic viewfinder which is good (though bulky and ugly in my opinion).It is easy to use while wearing glasses.You can see the whole frame with glasses.

(On my x1 I use the Leica SBLOO viewfinder which looks beautiful on the camera and gives a larger image than the EVF, but is less convenient to use with glasses).

This isn't the first time that I've heard that the LCD is actually better, despite being the same resolution as the X1. Hopefully, that's true and the screen is a little more useable when out in the sun.

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...