Jump to content

T vs X-Vario +X(2)

tom0511

By tom0511
in Leica CL / TL / TL2 / T Forum

 Share

Recommended Posts

tom0511

tom0511

Posted
Posted

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I still own both myself and would be interested to hear other peoples experience/opinion on their take about T-System vs X-Vario + X2 (orX)...

 

me?

in favor of the T:

+ the 35 equivalent is f2.0 (compared to x2)

+ slightly faster AF

+ longer zoom and faster as well (70mm fov vs 85mm fov)

+ nice display

+ better external viewfinder

++ other zoom lenses in the future

in favor of the X:

+ I like the manual wheels for f-stop and aparture

+ flash syncs at all aparture times

+ x2 is smaller fits better in pocket than T+23mm

 

I cant see much if any difference in iq

Link to post
Share on other sites
colonel

colonel

Posted
Posted
I still own both myself and would be interested to hear other peoples experience/opinion on their take about T-System vs X-Vario + X2 (orX)...

 

me?

in favor of the T:

+ the 35 equivalent is f2.0 (compared to x2)

+ slightly faster AF

+ longer zoom and faster as well (70mm fov vs 85mm fov)

+ nice display

+ better external viewfinder

++ other zoom lenses in the future

in favor of the X:

+ I like the manual wheels for f-stop and aparture

+ flash syncs at all aparture times

+ x2 is smaller fits better in pocket than T+23mm

 

I cant see much if any difference in iq

 

The user interface change is massive. You have to see which one you like.

 

The T has no AA filter. I found the one on the X2 to be too strong.

The X2 lens has to extend on on, I don't like this

The T is likely to get the better firmware updates

The T is better built

The T body is slightly smaller then the XV and X113, but not the X2

The T is more configurable

The T has more room for functionality updates due to the T interface

 

The XV zoom goes closer then the Tzoom

The XV has more traditional controls. Can mostly be set with camera off

The XV zoom lens is better built then the Tzoom IMHO, marginally

The XV zoom hardly extends on zooming, therefore more subtle

The XV has an almost silent shutter

 

Rgds

Link to post
Share on other sites
Ecaton

Ecaton

Posted
Posted

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Just an unsubstantiated internet rumor or is there an official Leica source for this information?

 

The rumors are: T= no filter. X2=AA filter. XV=weaker than X2 filter.

And the saga continues? X109 and X113. X113=weaker than 109, but stronger than T. X=109= stronger than.....yet but still weaker than..... and equal to..........?.

Reminds of the bullock with the Panasonic versus Leica sibling JPEG engines and lens coatings.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
colonel

colonel

Posted
Posted
Just an unsubstantiated internet rumor or is there an official Leica source for this information?

 

Its much more then a rumor

It was mentioned by Daniels in an interview and is substantiated by much independent testing, including Reid Reviews

 

The rumors are: T= no filter. X2=AA filter. XV=weaker than X2 filter.

And the saga continues? X109 and X113. X113=weaker than 109, but stronger than T. X=109= stronger than.....yet but still weaker than..... and equal to..........?.

Reminds of the bullock with the Panasonic versus Leica sibling JPEG engines and lens coatings.

 

Note that you are incorrect above, the T has no AA filter

Link to post
Share on other sites
thighslapper

thighslapper

Posted
Posted

Note that you are incorrect above, the T has no AA filter

 

 

.... and that is borne out in practice ..... XV files need much more sharpening ...... I have the default set to 90 in LR .... whereas T files improve only a little with ANY sharpening ..... similar to those from the M240

Link to post
Share on other sites
renes

renes

Posted
Posted

Hi,

 

Do you see any differences in colour rendering between X-Vario 18-46mm Vario-Elmar lens and Vario-Elmar-T 18-56mm from Leica T? I do not own neither camera , but looking at samples in the net I like much more these taken with X-Vario.

Link to post
Share on other sites
colonel

colonel

Posted
Posted
Hi,

 

Do you see any differences in colour rendering between X-Vario 18-46mm Vario-Elmar lens and Vario-Elmar-T 18-56mm from Leica T? I do not own neither camera , but looking at samples in the net I like much more these taken with X-Vario.

 

I agree and don't know why

The X 113 also has a very special look

I am looking with interest on what the 11-23 looks like

Link to post
Share on other sites
tom0511

tom0511

Posted
  • Author
Posted
Hi,

 

Do you see any differences in colour rendering between X-Vario 18-46mm Vario-Elmar lens and Vario-Elmar-T 18-56mm from Leica T? I do not own neither camera , but looking at samples in the net I like much more these taken with X-Vario.

 

I am not sure at this Point.

I have shot a few Scenes with both cameras T and X-Vario but exposure was a little different so ist not scientific and hard to analyse.

- if there is a difference it is not huge

- eventually the X-Vario Color might be slightly more saturated and slightly warmer compared to the T; I like the Color from both very much and prefer them for example over the Colors I got from Pentax K5IIs/K3 and over that I get from Canon 5dIII (which I prefer over Nikon Skin Color); I also go so far to say I orefer the Color of the T over that from the M- eventually the Images from the T come out slightly sharper than those from the X-Vario, except the Corners of the T-Zoom might be very slightly less sharp than those from the X-Vario.

-it also seems the T-23 Summicron to render slightly colder than the T-zoom (just my Impression)

 

I think my decision will go into the direction of the T.

The main reasons being

a) the better viewfinder

B) more responsive camera

c) flexibility: you can use it like a X-Vario when using the zoom; you can use it like a X with the 24 Summicron; in the future you can also use it as a whole System including Tele and Wide if needed; and I can put my M-lenses on it; I have tried for example the 35/1.4 FLE as a fast Standard lens, the 50APO and the Zeis 85/2.0 for some Portraits which has worked very fine.

 

Of course I really like the Manual Focus of the X-Vario a lot with distance marks and how you Switch between MF and AF and I like the wheels of the X-Vario.

But for me the T seems the more responsive and flexible camera/System

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
renes

renes

Posted
Posted
I agree and don't know why

The X 113 also has a very special look

I am looking with interest on what the 11-23 looks like

 

I was considering on Leica T but the the colours that these new lenses render do not touch me at all, they are nice, maybe better than other brands but not as nice and great as X-Vario or M and R Elmar-Cron lenses. I am wondering if T lenses are not made by Panasonic including glass.

Link to post
Share on other sites
colonel

colonel

Posted
Posted (edited)
I was considering on Leica T but the the colours that these new lenses render do not touch me at all, they are nice, maybe better than other brands but not as nice and great as X-Vario or M and R Elmar-Cron lenses. I am wondering if T lenses are not made by Panasonic including glass.

 

X lenses are made by Leica but not necessarily in their German factory (could be Portuguese one)

 

T lenses are made by a 3rd party manufacturer in Japan, which to date Leica has managed to keep secret. Hard to know if this has any influence as I suspect Leica is in control of specification to the smallest detail.

 

However generally comparing the performance of well designed body and lens integrations, such as the X100, RX1, Ricoh GR, etc they tend to have a certain performance which the equivalent interchangeable siblings never seem to quite match. Possibly something to do with dropping the need for any tolerance in the mount, it just pairs exactly.

 

The x-Vario, and I think even more the X typ 113, have a beautiful type of rendering I have only ever seen in the M series.

Edited by colonel
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
IkarusJohn

IkarusJohn

Posted
Posted

I'm sure someone will say one is plasticky, the other not, and there is a clear difference, how could anyone not see it etc etc

 

Me? I can see slight differences in exposure (the second is slightly under-exposed compared to the first, giving it more colour saturation), but I couldn't say which is which, or if one is better than the other. I'm sure I'm about to be educated, though.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...