saibaiwei Posted September 17, 2013 Share #21 Posted September 17, 2013 Advertisement (gone after registration) The ironic part is that there is a lot of SONY in both Olympus OMD, EM1 as well as XV files as they use Sony sensors. Following discussions on LF about the XV is amusing. The high iso capability of the XV gets raved about, courtesy to the "usual" 16MP aps-c Sony sensor I like to emphasize, a sensor which can be found in quite a number of cameras and which is a known quantity for some time now. Leicaphiles prefer to forget this. It is simpler to me. The X Vario gives me the files I prefer, and the X Vario gives me great pleasure using it. It is the camera as a whole that I so tremendously enjoy. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted September 17, 2013 Posted September 17, 2013 Hi saibaiwei, Take a look here Puts' review of the X Vario. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
Thomas Chen Posted September 18, 2013 Share #22 Posted September 18, 2013 So for ME, I am stuck for the foreseeable future with the XV. The IQ is truly world class. The lens is world class and the camera build and quality just feels fantastic in the hand. I really like the MF and feel it beats focus peaking any day of the week. The zoom range meets 98% of my needs and the color is just phenomenal, especially in raw. It has issues but I have learned to work around most and it makes me a better photographer because I have to think about what I am doing. It isn't a P&S that gets mediocre pictures consistently like my iPhone without thinking. John, I see a lot of wonderful images created by M8 in your site, how you compare the IQ of DNG between X-Vario and M8? As I have a M8 and am considerin to buy X-Vario if it is so good as you have described. Can you share some pieces of DNG made by X-Vario with us and put them in the Dropbox? Thanks and Best Regards, Thomas Chen Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
barjohn Posted September 28, 2013 Share #23 Posted September 28, 2013 Thomas, just saw your post and I will put some photos in a dropbox folder and post when they are up. I have now posted a few images. These were shot while on a business trip in Virginia. I have included the JPG, the edited DNG, and edited TIF and the original DNG. The DNG files that have a -2 are the unedited version. Some of the ones where there is no second dng file with the same name may be unedited too. You should be able to tell when you open in LR. What you will notice is that the unedited DNG files may appear to have blown highlights and be a bit soft. They recover very nicely and they also sharpen very nicely. Many of these scenes had a very high dynamic range but the XV seemed to handle them well. The tif files are large so it may take a while for them to upload. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
barjohn Posted September 28, 2013 Share #24 Posted September 28, 2013 There have been more than a few posts about how the Sony RX-1R compares to the X Vario. A friend I convinced to buy an X Vario decided based on his desire for better high ISO capability that he also needed a Sony RX-1R. We were both curious as to how these two cameras would compare. I had previously owned the RX-1 and I thought it would be close but that the Sony would probably outperform the XV in resolution and low light and that it should do so by a considerable margin given it has 8 more megapixels and is a FF sensor. I am posting here side-by-side comparisons at 100%. I was surprised, as was he, that the XV seems to have slightly better resolution and is only around 1/4 to 1 stop worse in ISO from 1600 to 6400. That is our opinion and your opinion may differ. I have edited both the Leica images and the Sony images in an attempt to optimize each. I did not shoot these files, they were shot by my friend. In at least one case, the focus was slightly off on the Leica shot (the ISO 3200 images) but since the noise was the main thing we were looking for that should be overlooked. All the images were shot hand-held so camera shake could be an issue. This is not a scientific comparison but merely an attempt to satisfy our own curiosity. Enjoy the peek and comments welcome: Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/212527-puts-review-of-the-x-vario/?do=findComment&comment=2430037'>More sharing options...
Ecaton Posted September 28, 2013 Share #25 Posted September 28, 2013 There have been more than a few posts about how the Sony RX-1R compares to the X Vario. A friend I convinced to buy an X Vario decided based on his desire for better high ISO capability that he also needed a Sony RX-1R. We were both curious as to how these two cameras would compare. I had previously owned the RX-1 and I thought it would be close but that the Sony would probably outperform the XV in resolution and low light and that it should do so by a considerable margin given it has 8 more megapixels and is a FF sensor. I am posting here side-by-side comparisons at 100%. I was surprised, as was he, that the XV seems to have slightly better resolution and is only around 1/4 to 1 stop worse in ISO from 1600 to 6400. That is our opinion and your opinion may differ. I have edited both the Leica images and the Sony images in an attempt to optimize each. I did not shoot these files, they were shot by my friend. In at least one case, the focus was slightly off on the Leica shot (the ISO 3200 images) but since the noise was the main thing we were looking for that should be overlooked. All the images were shot hand-held so camera shake could be an issue. This is not a scientific comparison but merely an attempt to satisfy our own curiosity. Enjoy the peek and comments welcome: I have no idea how on can conclude from these examples that the XV "outresolves" the RX1R. All I see is half and not just one of the XV shots being unsharp (first, second, third, last), be it because of its AF issue or because of camera shake. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaptZoom Posted September 28, 2013 Share #26 Posted September 28, 2013 I have no idea how on can conclude from these examples that the XV "outresolves" the RX1R. All I see is half and not just one of the XV shots being unsharp (first, second, third, last), be it because of its AF issue or because of camera shake. You're right, a conclusion regarding resolving ability can not or should not be drawn from the provided samples. I think the sequence shown is for comparing high ISO rather than the lens/sensor resolving performance. Excerpt from barjohn's post in question: ...In at least one case, the focus was slightly off on the Leica shot (the ISO 3200 images) but since the noise was the main thing we were looking for that should be overlooked.... -- -- -- -- barjohn Thank you for taking the time to do the comparison and for sharing it here. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
barjohn Posted September 28, 2013 Share #27 Posted September 28, 2013 Advertisement (gone after registration) I realize that it can be difficult to discern differences in resolution from the 1,000 pixel limited files allowed to be posted. Here is a link to larger images in DropBox. Whether you think the focus is off or not (it is on some of each camera), it should become apparent that the RX-1R is not resolving anymore detail than the XV and in some cases less. Additionally the noise level on high ISO files is not that different. The noise slider was set to zero for all files shown. I have also included the RAW files of several of the comparisons so you can play to your hearts content. All I can add is the guy that owns both cameras and has a bias toward the Sony says that he sees more detail in the XV files and he has the cameras there to compare. I can only go by the files he sent me and that is my conclusion too. One last note is to compare MTF charts for the lenses. Note that Leica MTF charts are measured, not computed. As can be seen, the XV lens is considerably better. Of course, it has to be 50% better to provide similar results from a smaller sensor. Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/212527-puts-review-of-the-x-vario/?do=findComment&comment=2430058'>More sharing options...
Thomas Chen Posted September 28, 2013 Share #28 Posted September 28, 2013 I have now posted a few images. These were shot while on a business trip in Virginia. I have included the JPG, the edited DNG, and edited TIF and the original DNG. The DNG files that have a -2 are the unedited version. Some of the ones where there is no second dng file with the same name may be unedited too. You should be able to tell when you open in LR. What you will notice is that the unedited DNG files may appear to have blown highlights and be a bit soft. They recover very nicely and they also sharpen very nicely. Many of these scenes had a very high dynamic range but the XV seemed to handle them well. The tif files are large so it may take a while for them to upload. John, Thanks a lot for your post at the Dropbox. I've downloaded them for browsing. The files are very pleasing no matter in the color or the resolution, indeed comes from an outstanding camera. I'm thinking should I get the XV or wait for a while to have the "Leica 100 Anniversary M" to come. In case you have opportunity to take portaits (close-up) with the XV, please also uplaod to the Dropbox, allowing me to observe the gradation of skin tone. Thanks and best Regards, Thomas Chen Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
barjohn Posted September 28, 2013 Share #29 Posted September 28, 2013 Added some portrait shots of my grandson and my wife. I wasn't that close so I don't have as good a bokeh effect as possible. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
colonel Posted September 28, 2013 Share #30 Posted September 28, 2013 The ironic part is that there is a lot of SONY in both Olympus OMD, EM1 as well as XV files as they use Sony sensors. Following discussions on LF about the XV is amusing. The high iso capability of the XV gets raved about, courtesy to the "usual" 16MP aps-c Sony sensor I like to emphasize, a sensor which can be found in quite a number of cameras and which is a known quantity for some time now. Leicaphiles prefer to forget this. yes, it is a APS-C sensor that is known as an excellent ISO performer (Amateur photographer noted recently that ITHO its still the best APS-C sensor available) and, incidentally, the XV has the latest revision of it, and the weakest AA filter that has been deployed with it. coupled with the fabulous Leica lens I can't see a reason for anything but joy! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
colonel Posted September 28, 2013 Share #31 Posted September 28, 2013 Added some portrait shots of my grandson and my wife. I wasn't that close so I don't have as good a bokeh effect as possible. I completely respect your review and comments and agree with most of them. Not totally comfortable with comparisons between the RX1 and the XV as they are different beasts. The toss up between fixed and variable is up to the individual. The XV certainly has better colours then the RX1 but the RX1 is the dogs b@@@@cks when it comes to detail. As I have an M9 I sold my RX1 as I didn't need it for fixed FL anymore and the XV is the perfect accompaniment to the M9 when a zoom is needed. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
barjohn Posted September 28, 2013 Share #32 Posted September 28, 2013 The nice thing on the XV is that you have that detail and micro contrast at a range of focal lengths and apertures. The RX-1R is an excellent camera and the colors are close to the XVs if WB is set the same for both. However, there is a pop in the XV images that isn't quite there in the RX-1R. It clearly wins at ISO 3200 and 6400. I don't both shooting above that as I don't like the results from any camera above 6400. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
saibaiwei Posted September 29, 2013 Share #33 Posted September 29, 2013 I completely respect your review and comments and agree with most of them. Not totally comfortable with comparisons between the RX1 and the XV as they are different beasts. The toss up between fixed and variable is up to the individual. The XV certainly has better colours then the RX1 but the RX1 is the dogs b@@@@cks when it comes to detail. As I have an M9 I sold my RX1 as I didn't need it for fixed FL anymore and the XV is the perfect accompaniment to the M9 when a zoom is needed. Absolutely! The X Vario is to me, the best companion to my M bodies. They complement each other so very well. Together, they form a light-weight yet formidable set of arsenal that I had tried so hard to obtain in the past. Love it! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mixalis Posted September 29, 2013 Share #34 Posted September 29, 2013 John, I agree with your position entirely. I too owned an RX1 and have nothing bad to say about it. But I also have an M and, with a 35 'Cron, it can do the job of the RX1, so I turned my attention to something with a zoom. I bought the X-V after considerable deliberation and research. Initially I was one of the naysayers, almost entirely based on the slow maximum aperture, but I have come to understand that the lens on the X-V is right up there with the best. I don't feel short-changed vis-a-vis Leica primes in any of the four standard focal lengths and I am getting excellent pictures. It is nice, after years with Ms, to have a variable focal length available without swapping lenses, particularly when there is very little, if any, penalty in lens quality. I think of it less as a zoom lens and more of a sort of Quad-Elmar with four distinct focal lengths, 28, 35, 50 and 70. I would have even welcomed a click stop at 35 and 50mm but I realise this could have been a step too far for most users. As an aside, I have an old 28-70 Vario Elmar R sitting in my cupboard and I am just waiting to bolt it on to my M240 when Leica gets its act together. It amuses me to think that this will turn the M into a Maxi X-V. Leica marketing department please note my copyright on this wonderful idea. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ecaton Posted September 30, 2013 Share #35 Posted September 30, 2013 yes, it is a APS-C sensor that is known as an excellent ISO performer (Amateur photographer noted recently that ITHO its still the best APS-C sensor available) and, incidentally, the XV has the latest revision of it, and the weakest AA filter that has been deployed with it. coupled with the fabulous Leica lens I can't see a reason for anything but joy! The weakest AA filter mated with this sensor is in the Nikon Coolpix A and the Ricoh GR, as they have none;). Is there anywhere a source confirming that something like a "latest revision" of this sensor is around? Imo, the XV uses the usual Sony aps-c 16MP sensor, as is being used in quite a number of makes. A good sensor, for sure, but no match for the FF sensor in the RX1, not even close (I own the Rico GR with this sensor and the RX1). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest badbob Posted September 30, 2013 Share #36 Posted September 30, 2013 The weakest AA filter mated with this sensor is in the Nikon Coolpix A and the Ricoh GR, as they have none;). Is there anywhere a source confirming that something like a "latest revision" of this sensor is around? Imo, the XV uses the usual Sony aps-c 16MP sensor, as is being used in quite a number of makes. A good sensor, for sure, but no match for the FF sensor in the RX1, not even close (I own the Rico GR with this sensor and the RX1). I had the Coolpix A, and its lens was not good compared to the X Vario. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ecaton Posted September 30, 2013 Share #37 Posted September 30, 2013 I had the Coolpix A, and its lens was not good compared to the X Vario. Interesting, since one tester concluded that the Coolpix A it would beat the M - Summicron 28 combo. So another unsubstantiated statement suggesting that the XV beats the M. It was Ashley or Ming Thein, I believe. Here the reference to preempt Jaap`s comments about a certain KR: Tim Ashley Photography | Blog Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
colonel Posted September 30, 2013 Share #38 Posted September 30, 2013 Interesting, since one tester concluded that the Coolpix A it would beat the M - Summicron 28 combo. So another unsubstantiated statement suggesting that the XV beats the M. It was Ashley or Ming Thein, I believe. Here the reference to preempt Jaap`s comments about a certain KR:Tim Ashley Photography | Blog I am surprised that you can take seriously a review or comment noting that the f4.2 (FF equiv) Coolpix A "beats" the M with the f2 28mm lens BTW I can find people who say the earth is flat .... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mixalis Posted September 30, 2013 Share #39 Posted September 30, 2013 Interesting, since one tester concluded that the Coolpix A it would beat the M - Summicron 28 combo. So another unsubstantiated statement suggesting that the XV beats the M. It was Ashley or Ming Thein, I believe. Here the reference to preempt Jaap`s comments about a certain KR:Tim Ashley Photography | Blog I am not particularly interested in delving into comparisons between the Coolpix A, the Ricoh GR, Sony RX1 and other cameras. I own the Ricoh GR (a fine camera) and have recently sold my RX1 (a superb camera) so I am not exactly speaking from a Leica fanboy point of view. I bought the X-V because it suits me, as it will suit many other people, and because it produces excellent results. I also very much appreciate the manual control elements and relative simplicity. Whether the IQ is 1% worse or better than any other camera is not relevant for me. I wanted it, I bought it, I like it. Others can make up their own minds but it is not up to us to try to undermine decisions people have already made. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest badbob Posted September 30, 2013 Share #40 Posted September 30, 2013 Interesting, since one tester concluded that the Coolpix A it would beat the M - Summicron 28 combo. So another unsubstantiated statement suggesting that the XV beats the M. It was Ashley or Ming Thein, I believe. Here the reference to preempt Jaap`s comments about a certain KR:Tim Ashley Photography | Blog I read it, and basically it was vague and made assertions about "acceptable sharp edge to edge at f5.6", among other things. My memory of the Coolpix A was that it was good at f5.6, but terrible with night shots wide open. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.