Jump to content

Leica M lenses on Fuji X-Pro or XE-1


JDFlood

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I usually shoot a D800 or when street shooting, a Leica X2. I recently purchased a Fujifilm XE-1 for hiking and backpacking. The Fuji lenses have a good reputation. But obviously Leica are considered better. Does anyone have any experience with the Fuji and Leica on a Fuji X body? Slight improvement? Improves a couple things? Like night and day? I am trying to judge the value of buying a lens that is three times the cost of the body. JD

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've been using an X1-pro for two months now. The fuji 35mm 1.4 is a jewel. It is as sharp as any of my older leica glass. I'd go with fuji's lenses, if I didn't have the leica glass.

You also get auto focus with theirs.

One thing is true though, the leica glass is considerably smaller, and makes a more compact traveler.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you for your comments. That helps. I actually do take a lot of photos at max aperture... One of the reasons I picked the Fuji. I have mixed feelings about getting into the Leica lenses. If I get one of something good, I can seldom restrain myself on getting the rest. On the other hand due to my low light photography, a new M is likely on my future purchase list... The lenses could be a preliminary toehold into the M world. Any more comments welcome. Jd

Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Price is surely an unavoidable factor in your decision. Worth noting though, the size of the fuji lens as it's quite a bit larger than some Leica glass. A 35 summicron for example is quite a bit smaller in diameter and length compared to the Fuji XF 35. Other than the focus by wire, my biggest knock on the XF 35 is the size. I'm awaiting the forthcoming 27 pancake.

 

One thing I've been using the X-pro1 for is macro. I've got a Visoflex 1 with my 50 DR Summicron attached and it works quite well for this. Since I already had the lens, this was a much cheaper configuration than Fuji's macro option. Want to get some bellows and use my Hektor too.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Size does matter. The Fuji lens is big. I'm not sure I would buy a Leica just for that.

 

Price on the other hand, I am not as sensitive to. I appreciate nuance ( I am also an audiophile ), so if on some visible level the Leica lens is superior, like micro details, saturation, gestalt, then it will probably be worth it to me. I have an Leica X2 and I think (I haven't done a side by side) it bests the Fuji xe1. The photos are sharper and some other parameter is better ( I can't put my finger on it). Now the Fuji with 35mm has more light gathering ability, same sized sensor, and can take interchangable lenses. The real reason I bought the Fuji was to get an X2 with interchangable lenses... I guess I am trying to talk myself out of the New M.

 

This is making me think more about what I want out of a photo. For me it is emotion. To capture and convey a mood. I do landscapes, street and architecture. The first few shots from my Nikon D800 captured the soft ebbing light of a sunset like no other camera I have ever owned. I am pretty sure it was in the minuscule details due to it's massive pixel count. I tire of being a pack mule all the time, so for street and hiking I wanted a small light weight cameras. Perhaps the reason the Leica lens doesn't best the Fuji is the sensor is not big enough... Somewhat the opposite as with the D800 body that is now better than most Nikon lenses. So, if my line of reasoning is correct, I need to put that new M back on per-order. Pooh, I hate the idea of manual focus... I like the camera to get out of the way so I can concentrate on composition and light. JD

Link to post
Share on other sites

... Pooh, I hate the idea of manual focus... I like the camera to get out of the way so I can concentrate on composition and light. JD

I hear what you're saying but for me it's the other way round; with AF the camera sometimes focuses on what it wants to not what I want it to. Yes, there are ways around that but a) that's the camera 'getting in the way' again and B) for me, manual focus is as fast/accurate as AF.:o

 

Pete.

Link to post
Share on other sites

For me, manual focus is sometimes slower than AF,depending on the system I am using.

But I am certain that the camera is focussed where I want it to be, and that is at least as important as composition and exposure.

 

Gerry

Link to post
Share on other sites

what can compose better than a rangefinder when you can see outside your frame? With a rangefinder, you can say 'i'll move this left b/c i want this included'. For through-the-lens camera, all you can say is this 'let me move it to the left and see what pops up'

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

 

I would not purchase any serious lens below 90mm without mechanical MF. And after all the digital camera is just a sensor hanging on the back of the lens (even a leica M9 :p ).

 

So I would not consider any Fuji lens on a Fuji camera. Have to admit that haven't tried the Fujis.

 

Best of luck!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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