Mini M? [MERGED] AKA X-Vario

[colmac]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I do not think that the camera is bad (it focuses fast as above mentioned), but they over-hyped it! No wonder then that "we" expected something else.

 

Hopefully they will sell a lot of them.

 

I'm really starting to like the camera...

Having followed this thread from the beginning I'd say most of the hype was created right here while Leica folks with a smug look on their faces took a back seat. Bit of a kindergarten really...

[AlanG]

I do agree with others that the hype of the marketing and the lies in the press release raised a lot of hackles.

 

The product is not especially flawed in my eyes (reports are it can make nice quality images.) But it does not incorporate a lot of features and versatility that other much less expensive cameras include. So that makes me wonder if Leica's capabilities are still a bit behind the other manufacturers.

[captain]

There are too many forum members who think they know more about digital camera design than Leica - especially regarding what they think is feasible. They always moan - they moaned about the X1 and X2 and now they moan about the X Vario too. They are never satisfied - aways wanting what is not feasible or practical - always comparing Leica products to mass produced Far East offerings.

 

Leica have made what is probably a superb new compact zoom camera but their marketing of same has been poor with resultant disappointment from all those (including myself) who really did expect the MINI M to actually be just that ie a small M camera.

 

I don't think the X Vario will be the 'Edsel' that the forum's critics predict. The camera has much going for it - especially the Leica IQ which has always been an uppermost priority in Solms' designs and expectations

 

The next few weeks will hopefully result in more positive feedback from X Vario users and reviewers and thus give us a more balanced verdict - to counteract the 'never say good' critics' unjustified opinions.

 

dunk

 

Thats possibly because many forum members were using digitals long before Leica were knocking at Fujis door asking if they could put a red dot on one of their cameras.

[lct]

... So that makes me wonder if Leica's capabilities are still a bit behind the other manufacturers.

I began to wonder the same thing when the first Leicaflex was launched. Don't ask me if i know the answer.

[dwbell]

When Fuji announced the X100s, the X Vario was already in the hands of its beta testers.

 

I know you said it in defence, but when I thought about it some more, it might be a bit worrying!

[Ruhayat]

More perspective:

 

Someone had posted this one up at Steve Huff's site on the X Vario entry:

 

1) Leica X Vario w/28-70mm equiv lens @ 628 grams total weight: 95mm front-to-back depth

 

2) Fuji X-E1 w/28-85mm equiv lens @ 660 grams total weight: 108mm front-to-back depth

 

3) Olympus E-P5 w/Lumix 24-70mm equiv lens @ 725 grams total weight: 111mm front-to-back depth

[marknorton]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I do agree with the idea that if Leica had positioned this new camera as a development of the X cameras and left the M out of it, the whole thing would have been more comfortable.

 

It does seem that putting a large-ish sensor in a small body and a lens to get with it inevitably means a slow lens. My P&S - a Nikon P7700 has an f2 - f4 7:1 zoom lens which sounds great until you realise the 1/1.7 sensor is such that even f2 is not going to do much for you in terms of restricting DoF.

 

Sadly, If restricting DoF is your game, you need a large sensor and fast lenses which inevitably means larger cameras and larger lenses.

 

I still hope we might someday get a compact FF body capable of working with M lenses but for now, I'm more than happy with what the M240 does.

[Ruhayat]

Updated comparison:

 

APS-C competitors:

 

Tamron 28-75mm f2.8 constant, filter size 67mm, length 92mm

 

Sigma 17-50mm EX DC OS HSM f/2.8 constant, filter size 77mm, length 91.4mm

 

Fujifilm XF 18-55mm f/2.8-4.0, filter size 58mm, length 71mm

 

Sony E-Mount 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6, filter size 49mm, length 60mm

 

Leica X Vario-Elmar 18-55mm f/3.5-6.4ASPH filter size 43mm, length 85mm

 

Easier to make more sense of things now, innit. As mentioned earlier, girth matters more than length in the case of the X Vario due to the body size. Put in a Fuji 58mm in there and you'll be groping RX1-style bad ergonomics in your fingers.

[Ruhayat]

I do agree with the idea that if Leica had positioned this new camera as a development of the X cameras and left the M out of it, the whole thing would have been more comfortable.

 

It does seem that putting a large-ish sensor in a small body and a lens to get with it inevitably means a slow lens. My P&S - a Nikon P7700 has an f2 - f4 7:1 zoom lens which sounds great until you realise the 1/1.7 sensor is such that even f2 is not going to do much for you in terms of restricting DoF.

 

Sadly, If restricting DoF is your game, you need a large sensor and fast lenses which inevitably means larger cameras and larger lenses.

 

I still hope we might someday get a compact FF body capable of working with M lenses but for now, I'm more than happy with what the M240 does.

 

Ditto my Digilux 2. It has a Vario Summicron 28-90mm equivalent, at f2.0-2.4, but the filter size is 69mm. To cover a 2/3" sensor! Imagine how big it would have to be to cover APS-C.

[HV25]

This thread has sieved out the frequent whiners, for example several vociferous members who criticize Leica's production for a camera they have renounced, and they would never purchase one anyway because it does not satisfy their unrealistic fantasy.

 

I take this as an ideal thread to populate my ignore list.

 

So very many have taken Leica's new camera as an opportunity to declare, "my aspirations are greater..." but most cannot evince the same in their own work.

 

This thread's negative posts are about persons posturing, Internet personality building and have nothing to do with real life.

 

I think that is quite insulting. Its an obviously controversial topic and I quite enjoy hearing the opinion of others though I may not share their views. Its what forums are for no ?

[CaptZoom]

I think that is quite insulting. Its an obviously controversial topic and I quite enjoy hearing the opinion of others though I may not share their views. Its what forums are for no ?

 

No. Forums are for enforcing in-group biases and segregating the out-group. I thought everyone knew that!

[dwbell]

More perspective:

 

Someone had posted this one up at Steve Huff's site on the X Vario entry:

 

1) Leica X Vario w/28-70mm equiv lens @ 628 grams total weight: 95mm front-to-back depth

 

2) Fuji X-E1 w/28-85mm equiv lens @ 660 grams total weight: 108mm front-to-back depth

 

3) Olympus E-P5 w/Lumix 24-70mm equiv lens @ 725 grams total weight: 111mm front-to-back depth

 

Comparison are like stats, can prove anything. Add price and lens speed to his at it looks different.

 

Edit - I see you updated, nearly complete. I have no axe to grind or camera to bash. Just that stats are etc etc

[Ruhayat]

Comparison are like stats, can prove anything. Add price and lens speed to his at it looks different.

 

Edit - I see you updated, nearly complete. I have no axe to grind or camera to bash. Just that stats are etc etc

 

Well, I have the Digilux 2 as I have mentioned, and I used that camera for 2 years without finding it wanting. Used to have the D-Lux 3, too. And most recently I played with a V-Lux 4 in a shop because I was looking for a travel camera with a more versatile lens and maybe video. Seeing the images from these small sensor cameras makes me confident that image quality of the X Vario would be a foregone conclusion. And you'd probably get more DOF than you could with even the pseudo-Summilux D-Lux.

 

The only difference then is just how does it compare to the competition in terms of size and weight. My front-running candidate right now is actually the Fuji X10 due to its ergonomics - twist the lens to get the focal length you want, that's something I wished the D-Lux series had. I did check out the much raved about Sony RX100 but like the RX1, I find it to be the epitome of design leading function rather than the other way around and it annoyed me no end.

[mjh]

Thats possibly because many forum members were using digitals long before Leica were knocking at Fujis door asking if they could put a red dot on one of their cameras.

Really? The first Fujileica, the original Digilux, was introduced in 1998. For what it’s worth, I got my first digital camera (an Olympus C800L with 0.8 MP) in 1997.

[mjh]

I know you said it in defence, but when I thought about it some more, it might be a bit worrying!

Some people are always worrying … It looks like Leica wanted to launch the M as early as possible (the “Release it already!” chants in this may or may not have been a contributing factor) while they took their time with the X Vario. But then of course, nobody knew about the Paula project so they were under no pressure.

[jonoslack]

Updated comparison:

 

APS-C competitors:

 

Tamron 28-75mm f2.8 constant, filter size 67mm, length 92mm

 

Sigma 17-50mm EX DC OS HSM f/2.8 constant, filter size 77mm, length 91.4mm

 

Fujifilm XF 18-55mm f/2.8-4.0, filter size 58mm, length 71mm

 

Sony E-Mount 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6, filter size 49mm, length 60mm

 

Leica X Vario-Elmar 18-55mm f/3.5-6.4ASPH filter size 43mm, length 85mm

 

Easier to make more sense of things now, innit. As mentioned earlier, girth matters more than length in the case of the X Vario due to the body size. Put in a Fuji 58mm in there and you'll be groping RX1-style bad ergonomics in your fingers.

 

Hi There

For what it's worth I've just measured the XVario lens:

 

 

Leica X Vario-Elmar 18-55mm f/3.5-6.4ASPH filter size 43mm, length 60mm fully extended it's 70mm

I also measured the Fuji 18-55 as you say 71mm - but 110mm extended.

 

I'm not sure whether this is important, but it's worth mentioning

[Nei1]

I think a lot of people have shown their true colours during this thread,there seems to be a slight correlation between the number of comments that a poster has made and the degree of their quite extraordinary bigotry.A good idea would be to remove the 'no. of posts'-information from the profile section to equalize the strength of all our comments and to promote a wider discussion among a possibly more interesting group of people.....

[lct]

Found more hysteria than bigotry in this thread but it's because i must be a bigot myself i guess.

[Mark D]

I don't know if this is more funny or sad, but if my expectations for a true mini-m had not been so high I would have already bought an X-Vario.

 

Right now I want to see some indoor low light pictures and if they are any good I think I will give the X-Vario a try. I am looking forward to some of the shoot out type reports of the X-Vario vs Olympus, Panasonic and Sony.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[miatadan]

Because of Leica's saying next camera was " mini m" I was disappointed at first with Vario X with its slow lens.

 

I have read reviews from " reid review" and " Jono Slacks review", I understand more of why Leica chose slow zoom lens ))))

 

I was on the fence about X2 as I did not like retracting lens design which is common with so many cameras today. This is the reason I also would not purchase Nikon Coolpix A and Ricoh GR...

 

The interface on the Leica X Vario is very direct and manual focus is very easy ))))

 

I would rarely use 70mm end of lens and 90% of time be at 28mm. Thinking of using external optical 28mm viewfinder with X Vario if I purchase it.

 

Dan