Anybody switched from M to X-Vario? Experiences?

[stuny]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

KMHB -

 

I was referring to beewee's last paragraph in post #38 above.

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[Guest]

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.

 

 

 

@ stuny and beewee

 

please read > puts review of the X Vario part -1- < / today 10.09.2013 / 20.49Uhr

 

br kmhb

[beewee]

@ stuny and beewee

 

please read > puts review of the X Vario part -1- < / today 10.09.2013 / 20.49Uhr

 

br kmhb

 

 

Thanks. I understand Puts is quite reliable on his reviews. He does not mention anything about the AF accuracy beyond the fact that it is reliable (in his opinion), it is less efficient at close range, and that the focusing range is not continuous like on true manual focus lenses (not focus-by-wire).

 

That being said, it still doesn't convince me that the AF on the XV is free from problems. As always with quality control and production engineering, just because a problem is not spotted right away it does not mean that the problem does not exist. Purely from a math/probabilities standpoint, the null hypothesis cannot be that the XV is free of AF issues as there is no way to prove that it is the case - not even with a million samples. However, if the null hypothesis is that the XV has a focusing problem you can prove by direct observation (as I, John, and others have seen).

 

Moreover, Puts does not mention what version of the firmware he was using for the XV. It could be that this has already been addressed by Leica in firmware and Puts was testing an updated version. Or, it could also be that Puts was testing on pre-production firmware that did not have the bug and the bug was introduced only in the final release. Many things are possible so again, the bottom line is that the firmware that got shipped with the camera has AF issues. Whether or not this was a problem in pre-production or in some later un-released firmware is another matter.

[Guest]

Thanks. I understand Puts is quite reliable on his reviews. He does not mention anything about the AF accuracy beyond the fact that it is reliable (in his opinion), it is less efficient at close range, and that the focusing range is not continuous like on true manual focus lenses (not focus-by-wire).

 

That being said, it still doesn't convince me that the AF on the XV is free from problems. As always with quality control and production engineering, just because a problem is not spotted right away it does not mean that the problem does not exist. Purely from a math/probabilities standpoint, the null hypothesis cannot be that the XV is free of AF issues as there is no way to prove that it is the case - not even with a million samples. However, if the null hypothesis is that the XV has a focusing problem you can prove by direct observation (as I, John, and others have seen).

 

Moreover, Puts does not mention what version of the firmware he was using for the XV. It could be that this has already been addressed by Leica in firmware and Puts was testing an updated version. Or, it could also be that Puts was testing on pre-production firmware that did not have the bug and the bug was introduced only in the final release. Many things are possible so again, the bottom line is that the firmware that got shipped with the camera has AF issues. Whether or not this was a problem in pre-production or in some later un-released firmware is another matter.

 

hallo beewee,

 

E. Puts mentioned AF problem: Leica XVario = stepper motor // Leica S = continuously operating engine. The stepper motor might be the reason for same focussing errors. From my perspective, but only in interaction with other negative conditions. (example: for faster image section change "horizontal" >> "vertical".

 

br kmhb

[sfage]

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.

 

First things first, if you're going to shoot landscapes, try f11, for starters. Then focus upon something in the relative foreground and get that razor sharp.

 

Also, if you're going to do proper landscape work, don't even bother without a tripod.

 

PS: for landscapes, you should manual focus, anyway. The camera has no idea what to focus upon.

[colonel]

Manual focus is better for landscapes. Using AF I often focus on the hyperfocal edge.

In terms of tripods, if you need to smooth out water, for example, there is no choice but otherwise I do most of my landscapes hand held

[sfage]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Well, I suppose it is always about opinion. For me, I drive a big 350 V8 big block GMC. If I'm going to spend 50-100 bucks on gas... then it's gonna be on a tripod.

 

In fact, the way I look at it; anything worth shooting... is worth a tripod.

 

PS: $100 worth of gasoline is a lot of money to pay for a bunch of photographs I can't print or sell.

[beewee]

First things first, if you're going to shoot landscapes, try f11, for starters. Then focus upon something in the relative foreground and get that razor sharp.

 

 

This is old school thinking for MF.

 

Have you tried shooting f/11 on the XV? The lens becomes severely diffraction limited. You actually get images with LESS microcontrast than shooting at f/8. Even f/8 is getting a bit too small of an aperture and f/5.6-6.4 is really where you should be shooting to get the sharpest photos. Refer to the figures in Erwin Put's review to see the contrast drop slightly between f/5 and f/8 and then the massive drop going from f/8 to f/16. I've seen the same in images when shooting at f/11 and beyond.

 

Also, if you're going to do proper landscape work, don't even bother without a tripod.

 

Again, let me emphasize that the problem is not a narrow focal plane or motion blur. The XV is misfocusing (I suspect beyond infinity) since nothing in the image is in focus.

 

Shooting f/8 @ 1/500s on my M8.2 w/18SE, the 18SE is actually out resolving the sensor on just about every image that I take in the mountains. Another words, there is effectively zero diffraction, zero blur caused by objects being out of focus, and zero blur caused by motion of the subject, zero blur caused by camera shake. I really don't know how to make that more clear than this.

 

Also, if you're going to do proper landscape work, don't even bother without a tripod.

 

PS: for landscapes, you should manual focus, anyway. The camera has no idea what to focus upon.

 

Manual focus? Have you tried it with the XV? Doing it through the EVF is slow and painful and nothing like a rangefinder. Doing it by feel is a crap shoot since there are no distance markings or indication of the depth of field at each focal length. You'd actually get a worse hit-rate trying to manual focus as compared to a semi-working AF on the XV.

[beewee]

Regarding the use of tripods, there is a place for tripods and I have 2 of them (carbon fiber Gitzos if you care to know) but the mountains are NOT the place to be hauling tripods (for me at least).

 

On many occasions I hike 20-28 km (12-17 miles) and going up 1500-1700 meters (5000-5500 ft) in elevation gain on my feet in less than 10hrs. This is a lot of distance to cover and height to gain. Moreover, the terrain varies from a gentle trail to a rotten riverbed to steep meter wide cliff ledges that, if you fell, you'd drop a few hundred meters. Every gram in my pack counts and it was the main reason why I got the XV - to save 300g over my existing M8.2 / 18SE setup for big mountain days.

 

When I'm trying to figure out what is the bare minimum amount of water I need to reduce weight and I'm making trade offs between the safety of travelling fast and light versus carrying ropes and helmets, the LAST thing I need to carry is a tripod.

 

Just for illustration, the peaks you see in the image below are the types of peaks that I climb. The scree and snow slope is the type of terrain that I travel on which would be considered 'easy':

 

http://www.piktografi.com/Public/L1063771.jpg

[otto.f]

Yes someone in the German forum and he was angry, I tend to think at himself, but it appeared as anger towards Leica

[dkCambridgeshire]

Regarding the use of tripods, ... the LAST thing I need to carry is a tripod.

 

You could try the "Yorkshireman's tripod" ... Suitable length of string looped around your foot ... ¼ inch Whitworth bolt secured to the free end of the string ... screw bolt into the camera tripod thread ... pull string tight ... camera is stabilised as long as you apply equal and opposite force with your foot

 

dunk

[wilfredo]

Going back to the original question posed by John, I am an M8 shooter considering the Leica X Vario. After who had surgery to correct severe spinal stenosis, which has impacted my ability to use my left hand to focus a lens, AF is looking very appealing. Due to the mixed reviews on the X Vario I haven't made a decision. Perhaps a used camera may be the route for me as well.

[vcs700s]

Going back to the original question posed by John, I am an M8 shooter considering the Leica X Vario. After who had surgery to correct severe spinal stenosis, which has impacted my ability to use my left hand to focus a lens, AF is looking very appealing. Due to the mixed reviews on the X Vario I haven't made a decision. Perhaps a used camera may be the route for me as well.

 

I am an M8 shooter too but haven't touched it since I purchased the X Vario over two months ago.

 

Check my links below for pics and reviews.

[wilfredo]

Thanks Vic, this is helpful. I will check out the links.

I'm wondering about your prints? Are you able to print A3 or larger?

[vcs700s]

Thanks Vic, this is helpful. I will check out the links.

I'm wondering about your prints? Are you able to print A3 or larger?

 

I haven't gotten around to printing anything yet. I have printed off other cameras with a cropped sensor and can get good size and great quality.

[mrware]

Well, I suppose it is always about opinion. For me, I drive a big 350 V8 big block GMC. If I'm going to spend 50-100 bucks on gas... then it's gonna be on a tripod.

 

I do my photo jaunts in a Dodge with a V8 so I can relate. A good tridpod is the way to go.

[dkCambridgeshire]

I have not totally switched from M to X Vario ... but the XV is so convenient I grab it in preference to an M. The zoom lens gives superb results at all focal lengths. And with Elpro R lenses fitted, using the 70mm end (via stepping rings), the camera has proved to be a formidable close-up photography tool.

 

Best wishes

 

dunk

[leica1215]

I used to use X1 for the convenience and light weight reason, but I am not quite happy with slow auto focus,

 

has XV improved in the auto focus speed? many times when take picture from X1 take me sec or 2 to get auto focus, after all people's smile became not neutral. how you guys handling this when use X1 or XV?

 

looking forward to read your experience.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[barjohn]

I don't have any other Xs but the XV so I can't compare the two. The AF is about the same as the Sony RX-1 but it will miss focus and select something other than the desired target, even with the smallest box selected. A higher contrast object will be in focus and the desired target will not. This happens most frequently with people photography as faces are not always high contrast compared to items in the background.

 

I have observed this error numerous times as have others on this forum. There are a few that claim their camera has never mis-focused. Either they got an incredibly different camera than I did, they always shoot objects where that would not be an issue or they are not telling the whole truth.

 

The AF needs to be faster, especially as light levels drop.

[euston]

There are a few that claim their camera has never mis-focused. Either they got an incredibly different camera than I did, they always shoot objects where that would not be an issue or they are not telling the whole truth.

 

. . . or they made an effort to learn how AF mode behaves and they operate the camera accordingly. Failure to do that, I believe, may be at the root of the problems that some people are perceiving.

 

By the way, as one of those who hasn’t found their camera’s AF to be faulty, I take exception to your imputation of dishonesty.

 

Whenever I hear words such as “my camera mis-focuses” I suspect I’m listening to a photographer who is leaving too much to the camera. In my opinion, it is always the photographer’s responsibility to secure the desired focus, even when the camera is set to auto focus. Contrast-based AF systems have their limitations and it takes practice to get the best from them. I'm sure nobody here needs reminding but I'll mention it just in case: don't use multi-point AF unless you’re prepared to let the camera choose the focus point for you!

 

It is, of course, possible that the AF in a whole batch of these cameras is faulty but that is less likely, in my opinion, than that some people simply haven’t got the hang of it yet.

 

What is perceived as a characteristic of the technology by one person is perceived as a fault by another. The AF isn’t fast but it is accurate when there is sufficient contrast in the focus target for it to operate. A firmware update may be able to tweak the AF system but it can’t alter the basic nature of the technology.