Leica X (Type 113) Photos

[Maxx71]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

How does the pixel level quality compare to your 70D ?

 

 

I'm not sure if it's because I haven't used DNG yet but I do notice a difference with my 70D with the Canon having more detail without cropping.

[davidmknoble]

Still loving the film in my MP and the MM and M240, I also broke down for the 'pocket' camera and have an X Type 113 with the Visoflex. Since the LCD turns off so well when you move your eye to the EVF, I wish their were a setting like the Fuji X Series to completely turn off the LCD and not use it at all - that would extend the battery life well...

 

I took some quick shots inside and tested quickly the OOC JPEG with high ISO (800 - 6400) and posted that here:

 

Leica X (Type 113) Review – Part 1 | Outdoor Images

 

Sorry for the large image at the top, I haven't had time to crop. Overall, I like the improvements from the X1 and X2 (which I used). Then lens is outstanding and I love the manual focus to keep things similar to using the M line...

 

I'll be using outside in Charleston, SC this weekend, so we'll see!

[Advertisement]

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

[Guest DrPix]

Re: your review of X113. "Outstanding lens, the best Leica has..". Really? Of course bookeh is "nice", if THIS is the main criteria, and the "speed" (apparently extremely import for some photogs) is there all right. But "sharpness"? On first 2-3 openings rather "poor" in my oppinion. There´s always possibility of user´s error. I´ve had/used all X-cameras - X1/X2/XVario - wide open - are MUCH sharper than X with similar openings. On "my pics" and on "my screen":cool:.

[Ecaton]

Re: your review of X113. "Outstanding lens, the best Leica has..". Really? Of course bookeh is "nice", if THIS is the main criteria, and the "speed" (apparently extremely import for some photogs) is there all right. But "sharpness"? On first 2-3 openings rather "poor" in my oppinion. There´s always possibility of user´s error. I´ve had/used all X-cameras - X1/X2/XVario - wide open - are MUCH sharper than X with similar openings. On "my pics" and on "my screen":cool:.

 

We got your message. It`s all over the web. It`s either a lemon, the X113 you got. Or your screen, your eyes, or maybe the Summilux on the X113 ain`t sharp? We won`t know and frankly I don`t care. Repeating the message over and over again, however, does not increase credibility. My X113 seems to have a sharp lens. But then again, it might be my screen or my eyes playing tricks with me:eek:.

[jiayeong]

Re: your review of X113. "Outstanding lens, the best Leica has..". Really? Of course bookeh is "nice", if THIS is the main criteria, and the "speed" (apparently extremely import for some photogs) is there all right. But "sharpness"? On first 2-3 openings rather "poor" in my oppinion. There´s always possibility of user´s error. I´ve had/used all X-cameras - X1/X2/XVario - wide open - are MUCH sharper than X with similar openings. On "my pics" and on "my screen":cool:.

Exactly, I saw DrPix complaints/replies all over the forums, here and at dpreview. We got your points, and most likely yours is a lemon. Since you have already return it, case settled. [emoji4]

[Guest DrPix]

We got your message. It`s all over the web. It`s either a lemon, the X113 you got. Or your screen, your eyes, or maybe the Summilux on the X113 ain`t sharp? We won`t know and frankly I don`t care. Repeating the message over and over again, however, does not increase credibility. My X113 seems to have a sharp lens. But then again, it might be my screen or my eyes playing tricks with me:eek:.

 

Have a look at my site and you'll see how good my eyes/screen are. You don´t have to represent WE (pluralis majestatis), I is enough:). Maybe somebody else cares?

[microview]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Some of your zoo photographs show the appalling way we treat wild animals.

[Guest DrPix]

Some of your zoo photographs show the appalling way we treat wild animals.

 

Touché

[Guest DrPix]

Exactly, I saw DrPix complaints/replies all over the forums, here and at dpreview. We got your points, and most likely yours is a lemon. Since you have already return it, case settled. [emoji4]

Leica, a lemon? Can't be:). What if it's "emperor's new clothes"?

[Biggus Dickkus]

I hear the X defaults to F2.5 even when manually set on F1.7 for about 95% of shots. Anything closer the 4 feet and it defaults. It has been highlighted on Steve Huff's review of the X. If true this is a bit of a blow. I can't see X2 owners upgrading if this is the case.

[calithumpian]

I hear the X defaults to F2.5 even when manually set on F1.7 for about 95% of shots. Anything closer the 4 feet and it defaults. It has been highlighted on Steve Huff's review of the X. If true this is a bit of a blow. I can't see X2 owners upgrading if this is the case.

 

Could be overblowing it, but it depends what you want to do with the camera. If 95% of your shots are at less than 4 feet, then there could be something wrong (particularly in a review?) or you are a very particular type of shooter. For me, I have always preferred to use 35mm focal length for other things beyond arm and a halfs reach! In the sense that this new X gives you f/1.7 on all photos over this 1.2m distance, a stellar manual focus ring with AF dent (unlike the X2s quite poor MF implementation), a higher resolution, larger display, nicer and more refined build and design and the ability to use the new high resolution Leica EVF with gps I think it is a great improvement on the X2. A built in EVF would make it though!

[microview]

Time for a few more new pics now?

[Maxx71]

Time for a few more new pics now?

 

 

Of course, my iPhone photo doesn't do it justice but here a combo that should work well together. If I were to have only one, it would be my 113.

[Maxx71]

from the front they look similar Edited October 9, 2014 by Maxx71

[colonel]

Of course, my iPhone photo doesn't do it justice but here a combo that should work well together. If I were to have only one, it would be my 113.

 

Thanks

At current prices a x-vario and 113 are almost the same price as the 18-56mm and 23mm T lenses (without the body even)

Mighty tempting ......

[gbealnz]

Thanks

At current prices a x-vario and 113 are almost the same price as the 18-56mm and 23mm T lenses (without the body even)

Mighty tempting ......

 

 

 

I thought you already had the T?

Does this mean you'd have all three, or would you just buy the X Vario, and T113?

Gary

[colonel]

I thought you already had the T?

Does this mean you'd have all three, or would you just buy the X Vario, and T113?

Gary

 

 

Just thinking out loud. When a camera becomes the same price as a lens .....

 

I used the T for a long period of time. I also used the x-vario.

 

Rgds

[Archiver]

Two cameras for the price of two equivalent lenses sounds enticing. On the other hand, the lenses can be used on future long after an attached camera gives up the ghost. Having said that, I'd probably prefer two cameras!

[Maxx71]

In the market for my 113's partner. A Fuji X-E2 with Zeiss 50mm f2 ZM IMO would be awesome.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[Archiver]

In the market for my 113's partner. A Fuji X-E2 with Zeiss 50mm f2 ZM IMO would be awesome.

 

Depending on the effect and handling you are after, the Ricoh GXR and M-module plus the Zeiss Sonnar 50/1.5 could complement a fast 35 like the X 113 very well. The GXR-M renders in a similar vein to the M9, and the Zeiss 50/1.5 creates gorgeous images, too. As a reverse, I'd look at the X113 to complement the GXR.