tom0511 Posted August 21, 2013 Share #21 Posted August 21, 2013 Advertisement (gone after registration) Hi, After showing some of my X-Vario Pics to a Professional photographer yesterday, I have taken my decision to keep the XV and to sell my M8 with my silver 50mm ASPH Summilux. As I have some eyeproblems, the XV is the Solution for ME. I Love this Little Camera, and i have made some wonderfull Pics the Last 2 weeks. Especially the OOC JPegs B&W are stunning. It is difficult to improve picture quality by using LR5 and silverefex and the DNG Files. The availability of the 28-70 mm zoomrange has turned out to be extremely useful. I felt in love with the X-Vario, and I have cancelled my pre order for the M240! Next week I will post some of my best pics here. John Hi John, I use both Leica M and the X-Vario and I am also having a lot of fun with the x-vario. The camera handles extremly well, is a joy to use and the lens is very good IMO. I still dont want to give up the M but if I could choose just one it would be probably the x-vario. Enjoy! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted August 21, 2013 Posted August 21, 2013 Hi tom0511, Take a look here Anybody switched from M to X-Vario? Experiences?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
popeab Posted August 26, 2013 Share #22 Posted August 26, 2013 I've sold my M 8 with four lenses, my Panasonic GF-1 with two vario lenses and my old Leica V-Lux 1. I've bought a X-Vario, a V-Lux 4 and a very mint used D-Lux 5. I'm very happy now: light weight, small footprint, flexible in virtually any situation and very good pictures results. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stuny Posted August 27, 2013 Share #23 Posted August 27, 2013 I'm considering a similar set-up. I have the spiritual predecessor to the X Vario in the D2, as well as a D Lux 5, a V Lux 4 and a DMR/R8 and lenses. I suspect I'll sell the DMR, R8 and lenses and enjoy the smaller, lighter stable of remaining cameras. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
beewee Posted August 28, 2013 Share #24 Posted August 28, 2013 I took the X Vario out last week to the mountains. It was quite a nice sunny day so the colours were great but I'm disappointed that there were quite a few instances (10%) where the camera missed the focused substantially - even when I got a green focus confirmation box. Moreover, I've noticed that although I was shooting at 18mm (28mm equiv.) f/5.6 the majority of the time, I found the focal plane to be quite shallow and it's very difficult to get objects from 3+m to infinity all in focus. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
barjohn Posted August 28, 2013 Share #25 Posted August 28, 2013 According to the DOF calculator you should have had everything from 1.5m in front of the focus point to infinity behind in focus. Therefore, I suggest look for camera shake as the more likely culprit. What was the shutter speed? Can you repeat on a tripod? I could not when I tired. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dkCambridgeshire Posted August 28, 2013 Share #26 Posted August 28, 2013 I took the X Vario out last week to the mountains. It was quite a nice sunny day so the colours were great but I'm disappointed that there were quite a few instances (10%) where the camera missed the focused substantially - even when I got a green focus confirmation box. Moreover, I've noticed that although I was shooting at 18mm (28mm equiv.) f/5.6 the majority of the time, I found the focal plane to be quite shallow and it's very difficult to get objects from 3+m to infinity all in focus. Try using manual focus and set the lens at the hyperfocal distance. dunk Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted August 28, 2013 Share #27 Posted August 28, 2013 Advertisement (gone after registration) I took the X Vario out last week to the mountains. It was quite a nice sunny day so the colours were great but I'm disappointed that there were quite a few instances (10%) where the camera missed the focused substantially - even when I got a green focus confirmation box. Moreover, I've noticed that although I was shooting at 18mm (28mm equiv.) f/5.6 the majority of the time, I found the focal plane to be quite shallow and it's very difficult to get objects from 3+m to infinity all in focus. Depth of Field Tabelle* > 28mm > f 5,6 = 3,44 meter to infinity. (*camera X2, XVario the same sensor) br kmhb Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dhsimmonds Posted August 29, 2013 Share #28 Posted August 29, 2013 I'm considering a similar set-up. I have the spiritual predecessor to the X Vario in the D2, as well as a D Lux 5, a V Lux 4 and a DMR/R8 and lenses. I suspect I'll sell the DMR, R8 and lenses and enjoy the smaller, lighter stable of remaining cameras. Stuart, we all come to it in the end! I haven't looked back since I went down the same route last year.....but with a different steed! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
beewee Posted August 30, 2013 Share #29 Posted August 30, 2013 Try using manual focus and set the lens at the hyperfocal distance. dunk That's what I've started doing since noticing the focusing problems but this is just a work around for a problem that should not exist. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
beewee Posted August 30, 2013 Share #30 Posted August 30, 2013 According to the DOF calculator you should have had everything from 1.5m in front of the focus point to infinity behind in focus. Therefore, I suggest look for camera shake as the more likely culprit. What was the shutter speed? Can you repeat on a tripod? I could not when I tired. I was shooting at 1/500s. There's no way that I would get blurry shots shooting 1/500s on a bright sunny day. Not with my M8.2 w/ 18SE. Also there's difference between motion blur / camera shake and misfocus. What I'm looking at is not the type of blur that you see in camera shake and it's clearly way off creamy bokeh of the XV. Alghouth, I like the bokeh but I don't want everything to be bokeh. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
beewee Posted August 30, 2013 Share #31 Posted August 30, 2013 Below are two full-res images taken seconds apart, handheld at 1/500s, f/5.6 using autofocus. You can clearly see the difference between the two. Sharp Blurry Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dkCambridgeshire Posted August 30, 2013 Share #32 Posted August 30, 2013 Below are two full-res images taken seconds apart, handheld at 1/500s, f/5.6 using autofocus. You can clearly see the difference between the two. Sharp Blurry Check to see if the image stabilisation is switched 'ON' ... and if it is, turn it 'OFF' ... and see if this makes a difference. Some XV users have noticed that keeping IS 'ON' causes focus problems in good light when there is no need for IS .. i.e. when the actual exposure is outside the range where IS is activated. dunk Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
beewee Posted August 30, 2013 Share #33 Posted August 30, 2013 Thanks for the suggestion but IS was turned off for images. It was on for video but that doesn't apply for this case. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted August 30, 2013 Share #34 Posted August 30, 2013 Below are two full-res images taken seconds apart, handheld at 1/500s, f/5.6 using autofocus. You can clearly see the difference between the two. Sharp Blurry bildformatwechsel von 1) vertikal nach 2) horizontal > 2) mögliche ursache: a) unruhige kamerahaltung aufgrund des formatwechsels oder bewegungsablauf von 1) zu 2) noch nicht abgeschlossen. mbg klaus-michael Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted August 30, 2013 Share #35 Posted August 30, 2013 events after the first conribution a) double contours of the right-sided mountain silhouette = shake ? there is nowhere a part of area is in focus. another indiz to shake despite exposure time 1/500 sec. br klaus-michael Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dkCambridgeshire Posted August 30, 2013 Share #36 Posted August 30, 2013 events after the first conribution a) double contours of the right-sided mountain silhouette = shake ? there is nowhere a part of area is in focus. another indiz to shake despite exposure time 1/500 sec. br klaus-michael Could be shake even at 1/500 ... might be worth trying some comparison pics i.e. with and without a tripod. dunk Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
beewee Posted August 31, 2013 Share #37 Posted August 31, 2013 Thanks for looking at the photos but no, it's not camera shake. I have pretty steady hands and I've got literally thousands of shots on my M8.2 + 18SE shot at f/8 @ 1/500s (my default configuration when out in the mountains) and I've never seen this before. Moreover, the winds were calm that day, I was standing and stable. I wasn't shooting while walking. I've shot out of helicopters with a 300/2.8 handheld and got sharper images than this. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
beewee Posted August 31, 2013 Share #38 Posted August 31, 2013 a) double contours of the right-sided mountain silhouette = shake ? Double contours? The mountain to the right itself has many rock layers, I'd focus on the sky/mountain edges to determine sharpness. Or look at the rocks in the foreground. there is nowhere a part of area is in focus. another indiz to shake despite exposure time 1/500 sec. If it was indeed camera shake, you would get motion blur. In other words, there is usually a single direction that is more blurry than the other directions. This is clearly not the case as the blur is uniform in all directions which is pretty darn impossible to get unless your shaking is perfectly Gaussian in direction and amplitude. That to me would take a lot of skill to achieve, even mechanically at 1/500s. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stuny Posted September 2, 2013 Share #39 Posted September 2, 2013 Interesting. This is sounding as little like blood spatter analysis at a crime scene. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 2, 2013 Share #40 Posted September 2, 2013 Interesting. This is sounding as little like blood spatter analysis at a crime scene. ? ? ? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.