New Review

[barjohn]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Imaging Resource has just completed their review of the X Vario. I think it is an excellent and fair review. The thing that surprised me most was the color accuracy. It is the best they have ever tested. I knew it was good but this shows how good.

[waloszek]

Thanks for the link!

Gerd

(I added it also to the references on my site)

[Peter L]

I knew right from the start that this Leica X Vario is an outstanding camera, bought it unseen,

form the Camera store in Calgary, they send it to me in Kimberley (outstanding service, with a 14 day return policy )

 

Shot about 30 images, reviewed them in LR and knew immediately that this camera was not going back, in spite of all the whining and sarcastic comments, including BarJohn's, remember your early comments John ?.

 

People told me, I spend far too much money on this camera, they said that soon the price would drop well below $2000.

 

Even this new review, although an excellent review ,whines about the cost of this camera.

 

If one considers what one would have to pay for the focal lengths this camera encompasses,

even for Leica's slow 28 , 35 , 50 , and 70 mm lenses , this X Vario is a real bargain.

 

Quite a number of excellent professional reviews have been written , that are mostly positive (some very enthusiastic ) and point out some of the irritants of this X Vario that we all know, hopefully Leica will address these in the near future.

 

My favourite reviewer : Erwin Puts, I am awaiting his part 2.

[barjohn]

...

Shot about 30 images, reviewed them in LR and knew immediately that this camera was not going back, in spite of all the whining and sarcastic comments, including BarJohn's, remember your early comments John ?.

 

....

 

My comments stand. These are all things that can be fixed in firmware and should be fixed. I have consistently said it produces great images. I have not made price an issue because I agree with your comments on the lens quality and i view that as the major expenditure in this camera. If the zoom were merely kit lens quality the camera would have gone back.

[BrianLara]

Yeah the review is pretty great i guess. Thanks a lot for sharing it.

[euston]

Thanks for the link.

 

I notice that the reviewers didn’t report any mis-focusing by the camera. On the contrary, the AF system was described several times as accurate, which accords with my experience.

[nippa]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

That's the sort of review to make me buy ; just hoping for the fix to the focusing problem.

 

I had wondered how the high ISO would stand up against my X100S and , based on this , it looks much the same given that the Fuji uses excessive default NR.

 

That tele lens has sold it to me..now to convince my wife:)

[Guytou]

 

..now to convince my wife:)

 

It is often most difficult, but all becomes easy with its agreement…

 

Guy

[vcs700s]

At the end of the review it gets a "Dave's Pick."

 

I have been reading Imaging Resource for years. If I am considering a new camera, and it is given a "Dave's Pick", I am confident that it will be a good purchase. IR hasn't been wrong yet.

 

On a side note, tomorrow they will be featuring an image I took with the X Vario as their "Pic of the Day."

[Guest]

Danke für den Link. Vor 6 Wochen die XVario gekauft, beste Qualität in jeder Beziehung.

 

br klaus-michael

[mben]

Hi John,

 

I recently sold my (wife's) X Vario through this site's buy & sell feature.

 

Although I fully agree the X Vario has among the best colors I've ever seen and that its lens is very good compared to its peers (it is not "the best possible", as a quick comparison with the Ricoh GR 18mm f2.8 or the Sony - Zeiss 24mm f1.8 can easily demonstrate), operational slowness, lack of (to me) essential photographic features (AE lock, decent auto iso, ... you know the stuff), and cost-cutting ergonomics had the X Vario sit in a drawer most of its short life.

 

As per my wife, she took it once at an event and got back with iphone photos only ...

 

Back in late September I got from the local Leica dealer an X Vario to "test and review", and I made similar remarks: outstanding image quality (within the lens speed limitations) taken back by questionable design decisions.

 

That is really a pity, since 20x30 cm (8x12 inches) prints from the X Vario were perceived better than M240 comparable prints (BW's being midway between M240 and the MM).

 

As you already made clear, most if not all the X Vario issues are firmware fixable. And that is both a curse and a blessing, since a firmware fix is financially justified by sales, but the X Vario right now simply does not sell.

 

If a firmware fix happens before the X Vario becomes obsolete (potentially from Leica itself), I could consider buying it again. As it stands now, for my kind of photography there is simply "too much camera" in front of my eyes.

 

Mauro

[barjohn]

Mauro,

 

I can't disagree with much of what you posted. The one area I would disagree is in the comparison to the Ricoh GR. My friend had the GR and the XV and sent me a number of comparison shots. I found the XV images to be better. I have also compared the studio raw files from Imaging Resources and compared and even there, I think the XV is slightly better.

 

Here are some screen shots and links to the larger files:

 

 

 

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!

[mben]

John,

 

in the end it is a matter of taste as, taking aside the different color temp, I prefer the GR side of the IR side-by-side (the left bottle writing is better defined).

 

The GR and XV share the same sensor, they can't be that far.

 

I made a print test of GR vs D800e (exactly same scene) and XV vs M240 (same scene, different time). The GR rendered the scene with much more "3D life" than the D800e, as the XV did the same to the M240. In a blind test at the Leica dealer, all people involved attributed prints to the wrong camera ...

 

The two cameras are inherently different: the GR has a "hard" rendition, while the XV is soft. The GR pictures, either jpeg or dng, are great as out-of-camera, while the XV photos need a heavy handed approach to "revive" (I have a LR "XV baseline preset" applying exposure, clarity and sharpness adjustments right after import).

 

On next thursday I will test a "hardly used" M9-P for a potential purchase: I somewhat expect that it will struggle to compete with the GR.

 

(No way I am getting back to the M240: I will wait for V2, to hopefully surface in 2014).

 

M