Jump to content
🇩🇪 Neu: Leica M11-P Safari ×
🇬🇧🇺🇸 New: Leica M11-P Safari ×

Leica X Vario or Nikon DF?

zgisterak

By zgisterak
in Leica X

Recommended Posts

zgisterak

zgisterak

Posted
Posted

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Good day everyone

I just wanted to hear some thought on this matter.

 

I already have Leica X2 and totally love it but I miss zoom. I thought about adding "a sibling" to the family in the form of X Vario. However, past Sunday I went to Adorama and came across Nikon vendor demo new Nikon DF. I was blown away by ergonomics and feel of this camera. I owed Nikon F3 in the past and totally loved it.(it was stolen when my appartment got burglarized). I have a few Nikon lenses that this camera is compatible with. (this camera is compatible with most Nikon glass). What would you do?

Many thanks for opinions.

Link to post
Share on other sites
XVarior

XVarior

Posted
Posted
Good day everyone

I just wanted to hear some thought on this matter.

 

I already have Leica X2 and totally love it but I miss zoom. I thought about adding "a sibling" to the family in the form of X Vario. However, past Sunday I went to Adorama and came across Nikon vendor demo new Nikon DF. I was blown away by ergonomics and feel of this camera. I owed Nikon F3 in the past and totally loved it.(it was stolen when my appartment got burglarized). I have a few Nikon lenses that this camera is compatible with. (this camera is compatible with most Nikon glass). What would you do?

Many thanks for opinions.

 

I would stick to Leica. First, because by buying the XV you're extending your X collection.

Second you're sticking to the comfort and practicality of the one-lens-do-it-all " the XV's not only it does it all, but it does it the best way your eyes can imagine"

Fnally, having the XV will transform you from photographer with good gear to a photographer-in-love with his gear which in my humble opinion, is one of the XV pros that no camera can match.

Link to post
Share on other sites
jlindstrom

jlindstrom

Posted
Posted

If you're getting a new dslr, you'll be better off with D610. The Df is over hyped and far too expensive for what it is. And the focus to pure photography meant they dropped out movies, nothing more. It's still full of useless gimmicks like all the other dslr's.

 

Comparing it to vario is also a bit iffy, they're two totally different beasts. Comparing them almost sounds like you don't know what you want. Except that youwant something, which smells GAS.

 

If you really knew what you want, then you wouldn't really be asking either..

 

I know, I get the same temptatations every now and then. These days I resist them slightly better than earlier.

 

XV is fine in many ways and depends how you photograph wether it suites you or not. Definitely not for something fast paced, the af can't keep up. Which is the only reason I'm not considering it.. for next camera, something small with fast af to keep up with my daughter.

 

Stick with you current stuff and make changes when you know what you need..

 

//Juha

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

Link to post
Share on other sites
zgisterak

zgisterak

Posted
  • Author
Posted
If you're getting a new dslr, you'll be better off with D610. The Df is over hyped and far too expensive for what it is. And the focus to pure photography meant they dropped out movies, nothing more. It's still full of useless gimmicks like all the other dslr's.

 

Comparing it to vario is also a bit iffy, they're two totally different beasts. Comparing them almost sounds like you don't know what you want. Except that youwant something, which smells GAS.

 

If you really knew what you want, then you wouldn't really be asking either..

 

I know, I get the same temptatations every now and then. These days I resist them slightly better than earlier.

 

XV is fine in many ways and depends how you photograph wether it suites you or not. Definitely not for something fast paced, the af can't keep up. Which is the only reason I'm not considering it.. for next camera, something small with fast af to keep up with my daughter.

 

Stick with you current stuff and make changes when you know what you need..

 

//Juha

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

 

Dude... Please, read my post carefully before ASSuming that I don't know what I want. I do have a bit GAS but my objective is to get a more versatile camera that allows me to take pics that are in line with photojournalism, street photography, landscapes, scenery, and possibly portraits. This can be achieved with X2 but with some troubles (slow AF). In New York City people don't like when you're in their face. In addition, I already own some of the Nikon glass. I do appreciate your feedback about shortcomings of XV.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Ecaton

Ecaton

Posted
Posted

Different beasts, for sure.

But do you prefer one of the best FF sensors in a body to last, an OVF, or the "me-too" 16MP Sony aps-c sensor, an Olympus last generation EVF and everything mated to a zoom with a boring range and an aperture starting shortly before diffraction starts to kick in. There is simply no contest among the two. But I`m the one who believes that Leica should have never bothered to waste precious development resources for a camera as mediocre as the X-Vario.

Link to post
Share on other sites
jlindstrom

jlindstrom

Posted
Posted

First of all, to zgisterak, it wasn't a personal attack. So no need to get upset or defensive. It was just something that came across reading your post, comparing two 100% different cameras.

 

Second, both cameras have their own strenghts and if they fit your particular needs - go for it.

 

Third, opinion was asked and given. At this stage I wouldn't buy either one. X vario is just too slow and the Df is over priced for what it is. For a dslr, it's decent size but that alone doesn't warrant for charging the extra money for using years old sensor with cheaper consumer FF cameras af module. It just doesn't add up, since it costs nearly the same as a D800. Slash the price by 1000€ and we'll be talking a whole different story..

 

In a way, that also applies to XV.. drop it to 1500€ and it'll still be expensive but not overly so. Perhaps enough to justify the extra cost on the badge.

 

X2 I like, have one myself. It was over priced as well, but I surrendered to my GAS and got it anyway. So just like Leica wants it ;-)

 

Same applies to my M9 + lenses.. far too expensive, but got them anyway.

 

So I'm not here to pass judgement on anybody for getting the GAS, I've been hit by it plenty.

 

Just discussing the cameras in the original post and telling what I think about them or getting them, since opinions were asked.

 

//Juha dude

 

Sent from my iPad using DudeTalk HD

Link to post
Share on other sites
jkphoto

jkphoto

Posted
Posted

Confession …. I bought one.

 

Was it too expensive? Absolutely. But then again, so is Leica gear. Why do we buy our M digital cameras and lenses given their prices?

 

In my mind because they "handle" the way we like or want. Can we make the argument that they are the best on the market in terms of image quality? That will get some very emotional responses, but in my mind, the Canon/Nikon/Sony etc cameras have offered excellent performance (better?) at lower prices. But we are willing to pay the prices Leica asks because the cameras give us something we do not get from the EOS-1/ D4/ A99.

 

Back to the Df … it felt a little "plasticky" in my hands. It is a little larger than I would have liked. It should have a replaceable focusing screen. I wish it was $1000 cheaper. but I bought one. Why?

 

Because it is, to me, the TYPE of camera I want to use. I can see it as an adjunct to my M9 for telephoto or macro purposes. Its combination of "analog" and digital controls is not perfect but usable. It allows an acceptable level of image control without searching thru menus. It looks like the right tool for me.

 

My initial impressions are positive with it in hand. I like the fact that my Nikon lenses of yore work with it. And it very nicely assists these aging eyes in focusing them. Is it a D4? No, not meant to be. However, I can blast 5.5 fps if I want to catch Shamu in a jump at Sea World (as I did yesterday).

 

At first I was disappointed in the choice of sensors. However, I learned a long time ago that the M8/8.2 gave me enough resolution for my needs. The M9 is more than I need in that regard. So I came to the conclusion that the "D4 sensor" was exactly what I wanted in this camera with its very low noise levels … maybe it would be closer to the levels of contrasts and subtleties that Leica provides.

 

As far as having the autofocus module from the D610 … I do not care as that is not the way I anticipate using the camera. And it is enough for Shamu and for quick focus on the streets. I do not need this camera for taking images on the sidelines of an NFL game.

 

in other words, it is a very nice combination of old and new. Inherently usable as an "old world" tool as well as a "new world" one. Is it perfect? No. Neither was the M8 or M9 or M240 if you read thru these very forums.

 

But, I see it as a somewhat different and exciting tool. One that appealed to me and my shooting style. I do not think it will appeal to the general public. But I would imagine that it would be more likely be attractive to members of this forum and the type of photography our M's provide us,

Link to post
Share on other sites
jlindstrom

jlindstrom

Posted
Posted

jkphoto: congrats on your new camera, hope you enjoy it thoroughly!

 

Now, let me reflect on couple of the pointers..

 

Same as you, my statements were purely from my own needs and feelings about the Df. So like I said in my first post, if it's what you want/need then go for it! As you did and as I would have done if I were to need/want it.

 

Then regarding the sensor. By no means did I mean it's a bad sensor or lacks pixels. It's more that technology has advanced since and considering the cost, I was personally expecting much more and definitely without AA filter. By more, I don't necessarely mean more pixels but more quality. My m9 has pixels galore for me and it's in the same ballpark as the Df.

 

The same logics, for me, apply to the AF module. For the cost, better was to be expected. Or alternatively big improvements for manual focus and the vf.

 

Considering the points above is why I think it's over priced/hyped. Not a tool for me.

 

But don't let me & my opinions spoil it for you. Your post looks like you knew what you were getting and you're happy with the purchase. It's the way it's supposed to be, get what youwant. More power to you!

 

The op sounded like a different story...

 

next: throw us a link with some nice Df originated photos :)

 

//Juha

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

Link to post
Share on other sites
jkphoto

jkphoto

Posted
Posted

jlindstrom … as you can tell from my post I do agree with you. Could (should?) have been different. Could (should!) have been cheaper. BUT …

 

… for me at least, it is usable and preferable to the normal digital cameras (which I do not own). The features could have been different. They are usable (to me) as is.

 

Bottom line is that I think I can be comfortable with the camera and let it "get out of the way" as I work in my (almost) normal fashion … using the aperture ring instead of a command dial etc. Just me. Old dog wanting to use old tricks. :o)

 

So far, I really like the feel of it with my Manual Focus AIS lenses. And, they seem to be performing well (really too early to tell, as I am just getting acquainted with it). But very promising!!

 

Good Luck and Good Shooting!

Link to post
Share on other sites
zgisterak

zgisterak

Posted
  • Author
Posted
Confession …. I bought one.

 

Was it too expensive? Absolutely. But then again, so is Leica gear. Why do we buy our M digital cameras and lenses given their prices?

 

In my mind because they "handle" the way we like or want. Can we make the argument that they are the best on the market in terms of image quality? That will get some very emotional responses, but in my mind, the Canon/Nikon/Sony etc cameras have offered excellent performance (better?) at lower prices. But we are willing to pay the prices Leica asks because the cameras give us something we do not get from the EOS-1/ D4/ A99.

 

Back to the Df … it felt a little "plasticky" in my hands. It is a little larger than I would have liked. It should have a replaceable focusing screen. I wish it was $1000 cheaper. but I bought one. Why?

 

Because it is, to me, the TYPE of camera I want to use. I can see it as an adjunct to my M9 for telephoto or macro purposes. Its combination of "analog" and digital controls is not perfect but usable. It allows an acceptable level of image control without searching thru menus. It looks like the right tool for me.

 

My initial impressions are positive with it in hand. I like the fact that my Nikon lenses of yore work with it. And it very nicely assists these aging eyes in focusing them. Is it a D4? No, not meant to be. However, I can blast 5.5 fps if I want to catch Shamu in a jump at Sea World (as I did yesterday).

 

At first I was disappointed in the choice of sensors. However, I learned a long time ago that the M8/8.2 gave me enough resolution for my needs. The M9 is more than I need in that regard. So I came to the conclusion that the "D4 sensor" was exactly what I wanted in this camera with its very low noise levels … maybe it would be closer to the levels of contrasts and subtleties that Leica provides.

 

As far as having the autofocus module from the D610 … I do not care as that is not the way I anticipate using the camera. And it is enough for Shamu and for quick focus on the streets. I do not need this camera for taking images on the sidelines of an NFL game.

 

in other words, it is a very nice combination of old and new. Inherently usable as an "old world" tool as well as a "new world" one. Is it perfect? No. Neither was the M8 or M9 or M240 if you read thru these very forums.

 

But, I see it as a somewhat different and exciting tool. One that appealed to me and my shooting style. I do not think it will appeal to the general public. But I would imagine that it would be more likely be attractive to members of this forum and the type of photography our M's provide us,

 

Ordered DF from B&H yesterday. It will be a great companion to X2 plus I can re-use my Nikon glass. B&H rock... I ordered it in Black (just like my F3 used to be :)

Link to post
Share on other sites
tom0511

tom0511

Posted
Posted
Ordered DF from B&H yesterday. It will be a great companion to X2 plus I can re-use my Nikon glass. B&H rock... I ordered it in Black (just like my F3 used to be :)

 

As an owner of the X-Vario I can tell you to believe you made the right decision.

In my experience the X_Vario is great for stills, landscape etc, and all that in good -medium light.

But its limited as soon as you are running in to lower light or into action. I really like it but I now rather bring a Pentax K5IIS with a 20-40mm plus one faster lens for low light.

Another option would be an EM1 with a 12-40.

I love my M-system, but after several months I find the X-Vario somewhat limiting and slow. The IQ is great though and also the manual controls are great. But if you have small kids (like me) and like action outdoors its not the right camera.

Link to post
Share on other sites
jkphoto

jkphoto

Posted
Posted
Ordered DF from B&H yesterday. It will be a great companion to X2 plus I can re-use my Nikon glass. B&H rock... I ordered it in Black (just like my F3 used to be :)

 

Good Luck with it!! The 50mm f1.8 seems like a strong performer thus far.

Link to post
Share on other sites
leicatraveller

leicatraveller

Posted
Posted
Good day everyone

I just wanted to hear some thought on this matter.

 

I already have Leica X2 and totally love it but I miss zoom. I thought about adding "a sibling" to the family in the form of X Vario. However, past Sunday I went to Adorama and came across Nikon vendor demo new Nikon DF. I was blown away by ergonomics and feel of this camera. I owed Nikon F3 in the past and totally loved it.(it was stolen when my appartment got burglarized). I have a few Nikon lenses that this camera is compatible with. (this camera is compatible with most Nikon glass). What would you do?

Many thanks for opinions.

 

 

sorry but i think this 2 cameras are totally opposite philosophy (one is compact another is enormous and heavy and with enormous lens)

Link to post
Share on other sites
jkphoto

jkphoto

Posted
Posted
sorry but i think this 2 cameras are totally opposite philosophy (one is compact another is enormous and heavy and with enormous lens)

 

Yes they are two different tools. The Df does not handle like an M. The Df also does not handle like a D4, nor is it anywhere near as big or heavy as the typical pro DSLR.

Link to post
Share on other sites
zgisterak

zgisterak

Posted
  • Author
Posted
Yes they are two different tools. The Df does not handle like an M. The Df also does not handle like a D4, nor is it anywhere near as big or heavy as the typical pro DSLR.

Getting my DF today... I agree about the size of DF. I was in Adorama and handled D4 and DF. Totally different beasts in size.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...