More confused than ever.... X2 or X Vario??????

[FosterKay]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Good morning!

Few weeks ago I bought a X2 and I'm really happy with the camera and definetly with the IQ. The lens is great and for 50-60% of my "object selection" everything is fine. But from time to time I miss a zoom. Especially with portraits..... Unfortunately I can't spend money on both cameras or above all an M with different lenses.

I know that it is a dumb comparison or question - but what to do?? Would the Vario be a good compromise?

I know, I know, I know....Best

Chris

[Advertisement]

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

[Guest]

Good morning!

Few weeks ago I bought a X2 and I'm really happy with the camera and definetly with the IQ. The lens is great and for 50-60% of my "object selection" everything is fine. But from time to time I miss a zoom. Especially with portraits..... Unfortunately I can't spend money on both cameras or above all an M with different lenses.

I know that it is a dumb comparison or question - but what to do?? Would the Vario be a good compromise?

I know, I know, I know....Best

Chris

 

hallo chris,

sell X2 and buy XVario, thats ok, a very good compromise. you have the world best lens with 28, 35, 50 and 70mm focal distance.

my leica dream-team: D-Lux 6 and X-Vario.

 

br kmhb

[spylaw4]

Alternatively keep the X2 especially if that high a percentage of your shots are covered by its focal length.

Save up for the X Vario they work well together. But what about the new C?

[vcs700s]

Chris,

 

I own the X2 and X Vario. I enjoy them both and they produce excellent files. Since purchasing the X Vario, the X2 hasn't been touched. The X Vario not only has a tremendous zoom lens but you can actually see the LCD in the daylight when shooting!

 

Hindsight is always 20/20 but if I had to do it all over again I would have just purchased the X Vario and skipped the X1 and X2. Of course, the X Vario wasn't available when I purchased either of them.

 

I shoot a lot of street photography and nature and the X Vario fills the bill perfectly. Hope this helps.

 

Reviews are available on my blogs. Links are below.

[Ecaton]

Keep the X2 and spend US 1100 for the Fuji XE-1 with 18-55mm zoom.

[Guest badbob]

Good morning! Few weeks ago I bought a X2 and I'm really happy with the camera and definetly with the IQ. The lens is great and for 50-60% of my "object selection" everything is fine. But from time to time I miss a zoom. Especially with portraits..... Unfortunately I can't spend money on both cameras or above all an M with different lenses. I know that it is a dumb comparison or question - but what to do?? Would the Vario be a good compromise? I know, I know, I know....Best. Chris

 

I took quite a few photos with the X1, but after a few months with no zoom, I gave it away. The X Vario is a really complete camera with awesome quality, physically and photographically. I have a Monochrom and Noctilux that cost a small fortune, but the X Vario is very nearly as capable and just as good quality for a fraction of the price.

 

Edit: The person who recommended the Fuji makes a very good point, but you have to know you want a Fuji, otherwise it can be a mistake. No way to explain that better.

[jaapv]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Alternatively keep the X2 especially if that high a percentage of your shots are covered by its focal length.

Save up for the X Vario they work well together. But what about the new C?

I have the Lumix variant and is a very nice small camera, excellent images for a cigarette-pack camera, good ergonomics, very usable on manual. I don't think it competes in any way with the X-series, though.

[barjohn]

I have a friend that had the Fuji and I convinced him to try the XV. It wasn't long before the Fuji went on eBay. He sent me comparison shots he took in JPG and in RAW and we both compared the files and cross compared. The XV out resolved, had better color, and while a little noisier at high ISO, retained much more detail. The bottom line was that the Fuji could not match the overall IQ of the files from the XV and its superior lens. We have recently been comparing the XV against the RX-1R that he just purchased and have been very surprised to see the XV have better detail and texture than the RX-1R in most circumstances. However, it is a much closer IQ race than the Fuji. The camera quality is also close but that darn lens is just incredibly good.

 

As you know the same Sony sensor is used in the X1, X2 and the XV but like in the days of film when we all had the same film, it comes down to the better lens and it is obvious after inspecting images that the XV lens is in a class by itself. Erwin Puts is right when he says it may surpass the performance of the APO 50 Sumicron and it does it at 28mm to 70mm.

[FosterKay]

Thanks for all the helpful answers and information. Regarding the brand: I will stay with Leica - it's more an emotional than a rational thing. I really like the concept and the handling of this camera (X2). My decision is now to sell the X2 and buy the XV. That leads me to the next question: is eBay the best place to sell it or the marketplace here or what....??? I really don't have a clue.....

Best

Chris

[wda]

If you don't want the hassle, do a trade-in with your Leica dealer. If you also decide to buy the lens hood (essential to me) and hand-grip (also essential for me) and possibly the EVF, you might get a good deal trading in your nearly new X2.

[Ecaton]

I have a friend that had the Fuji and I convinced him to try the XV. It wasn't long before the Fuji went on eBay. He sent me comparison shots he took in JPG and in RAW and we both compared the files and cross compared. The XV out resolved, had better color, and while a little noisier at high ISO, retained much more detail. The bottom line was that the Fuji could not match the overall IQ of the files from the XV and its superior lens. We have recently been comparing the XV against the RX-1R that he just purchased and have been very surprised to see the XV have better detail and texture than the RX-1R in most circumstances. However, it is a much closer IQ race than the Fuji. The camera quality is also close but that darn lens is just incredibly good.

 

As you know the same Sony sensor is used in the X1, X2 and the XV but like in the days of film when we all had the same film, it comes down to the better lens and it is obvious after inspecting images that the XV lens is in a class by itself. Erwin Puts is right when he says it may surpass the performance of the APO 50 Sumicron and it does it at 28mm to 70mm.

 

Now with this logic, the XV would beat the M240 and MM in IQ as well. As a number of credible reviewers have come to the conclusion that both, the Sony RX-1 and RX-1R handily beat the two Leica Rangefinders in sheer IQ. The burden of proof for such bold statements of yours is high, very high I would say.

[jaapv]

If you mean Digilloyd or Ken Rockwell you may find that they are not universally regarded as credible.

[Ecaton]

If you mean Digilloyd or Ken Rockwell you may find that they are not universally regarded as credible.

 

I`m sure you know of the names I am referring to when using the term "credible". And as a moderator of this forum you will know of the many posts of users of both, M9 or M240 and RX1 and their opinions how IQs compare.

[FosterKay]

To be really honest: I don't like technical discussions about brands, cameras or lenses. I have seen beautiful, amazing pics from talented people made with "poor" equipment like snapshot cameras or even mobile phone cams - pure emotion and hot eye-catcher. On the other side there are tons of pictures made with superior cameras like...name it..... maybe sharp as hell but empty and characterless.

If both, talent and equipment, comes together this is to fall on your knees for. As I am way to far from being talented, the X Vario will be more than good enough for me.

[Guest badbob]

If you mean Digilloyd or Ken Rockwell you may find that they are not universally regarded as credible.

 

If people will skip past the emotional view of Rockwell and his legal disclaimers, they will find the most fact-filled and technically accurate forum on the Web. I've gotten far more concrete information there than elsewhere.

[Guest badbob]

To be really honest: I don't like technical discussions about brands, cameras or lenses. I have seen beautiful, amazing pics from talented people made with "poor" equipment like snapshot cameras or even mobile phone cams - pure emotion and hot eye-catcher. On the other side there are tons of pictures made with superior cameras like...name it..... maybe sharp as hell but empty and characterless.

If both, talent and equipment, comes together this is to fall on your knees for. As I am way to far from being talented, the X Vario will be more than good enough for me.

 

This is precisely what Ken Rockwell says, and what so many people beat up on him for. His paper - Your Camera Doesn't Matter - is a classic.

[sfage]

Yes, I agree with this. I have been doing some experiment comparisons between a 50 cron and a QBM mount Rollei planar.

 

The Planar has better contrast and colour... and is just as sharp, if not sharper... and the bokeh is every bit as interesting, plus, it is f1.8.

[colonel]

I have a friend that had the Fuji and I convinced him to try the XV. It wasn't long before the Fuji went on eBay. He sent me comparison shots he took in JPG and in RAW and we both compared the files and cross compared. The XV out resolved, had better color, and while a little noisier at high ISO, retained much more detail. The bottom line was that the Fuji could not match the overall IQ of the files from the XV and its superior lens. We have recently been comparing the XV against the RX-1R that he just purchased and have been very surprised to see the XV have better detail and texture than the RX-1R in most circumstances. However, it is a much closer IQ race than the Fuji. The camera quality is also close but that darn lens is just incredibly good.

 

As you know the same Sony sensor is used in the X1, X2 and the XV but like in the days of film when we all had the same film, it comes down to the better lens and it is obvious after inspecting images that the XV lens is in a class by itself. Erwin Puts is right when he says it may surpass the performance of the APO 50 Sumicron and it does it at 28mm to 70mm.

 

I agree about the Fuji. Much of it's issues are due to LR not being totally compatible in my experience.

 

The sensor in the X1,X2 and XV are different

The X1 is a old Sony 12mp sensor from the D300 generation.

The X2 is the last generation 16mp Sony sensor, the same as the D7000.

The XV has a similar sensor but a later revision, however it has a much weaker AA filter then the X1 and X2

 

Rgds

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[colonel]

If people will skip past the emotional view of Rockwell and his legal disclaimers, they will find the most fact-filled and technically accurate forum on the Web. I've gotten far more concrete information there than elsewhere.

 

I like Ken's lens reviews but his body reviews are suspect, in that the "best camera ever" is usually the next one he reviews.

He however says things that are just not true, eg. Only use evaluative metering and never use spot, refused to review the M8 and says its rubbish, never use a tripod, the RX1 is no good (doesn't like Sony), etc.

 

The best reviewer is Sean Reid by far.

[sfage]

If you really want to get down to it, cost to cost, dollar for dollar, 35mm (or MF) film is the best deal going. You have a full frame "sensor", you can get a "reasonable" scanner that you can print 24X36, no problem, one can't bitch about colour because that is up to the person operating the machine --and their skill at doing it.

 

Quite frankly, I think the day we realize most of this stuff is just bullshit, is the day we have actually learned something.

 

 

... because it is... bullshit.