TK! Posted October 30, 2014 Share #1 Posted October 30, 2014 Advertisement (gone after registration) Hi folks, where is the X 113 really better than the X2? To me it seems like small evolution but not a big step. I draw this conclusion mainly from missing enthusiastic reviews and posts here in the forum. So from your point of view, does it make sense to upgrade from the pocket size X2 to the "clumsy" X 113? What is the gain in: Speed? Speed of AF? Sharpness? Light? ... (Please no "looks better in silver with the black EVF...") - TK Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted October 30, 2014 Posted October 30, 2014 Hi TK!, Take a look here X2 -> X 113 is an upgrade?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
Ecaton Posted October 30, 2014 Share #2 Posted October 30, 2014 Hi folks, where is the X 113 really better than the X2? To me it seems like small evolution but not a big step. I draw this conclusion mainly from missing enthusiastic reviews and posts here in the forum. So from your point of view, does it make sense to upgrade from the pocket size X2 to the "clumsy" X 113? What is the gain in: Speed? Speed of AF? Sharpness? Light? ... (Please no "looks better in silver with the black EVF...") - TK What`s the gain. Probably not much in IQ, but: Nice to have: 1.5 stop better light gathering. Some more dof control, though with a widish angle lens and only for focusing distances of 1.2m and greater. Significant: AF to MF switch. Distance scale on lens barrel. MF via lens barrel with a very mechanical alike feel to it. Excellent EVF although not too stylish looking. The X1/X2 are point and shoot cameras with comparatively awkward MF and ZF implementation. The X113 feels much more like a mini M in use. I had the X1 and AF, file write time and buffer of the X113 are significantly better. Don`t know about the X2. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
calithumpian Posted October 30, 2014 Share #3 Posted October 30, 2014 I upgraded form the X2 to the 113 recently. Apart from the extra light gathering beyond 1.2m (which is pretty significant – a "black hole" for light as Ming Thein mentioned in his review), I would say the upgrade comes down to how much you value manual focus. Because the output and IQ from their identical sensors and respective lenses make images from these two cameras very difficult for me to tell apart. The AF/MF implementation on the 113 is stunning and a big advantage over the X2 – this could alone be worth the upgrade if it matters to you. I found the X2s MF to be very poor and a definite weakness. The other pluses for the 113 I have found are in the LCD which is larger and higher resolution and the ability to use Leica's Visoflex 020 EVF with nearly 4MP and integrated gps (but an expensive accessory!). Both these upgrades to the LCD and viewfinder also assist dramatically with manual focus, as you can see things much clearer than with the X2. With my X (113) and XV (107) I spend almost all of my time in manual focus. The f/1.7 lets more light in while framing a shot and does not stop down during live view even at closer distances. This enables better MF and AF –*greater visual clarity and precision of manual focus in lower light and faster autofocus than the X2. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
calithumpian Posted October 30, 2014 Share #4 Posted October 30, 2014 The X113 feels much more like a mini M in use. I had the X1 and AF, file write time and buffer of the X113 are significantly better. Don`t know about the X2. I can vouch for this. I find the design improvements to the body worth the extra 100 grams in weight and additional millimetres to H/W/D. It is not as 'pocketable' as the X2 but feels on the whole like a more robust and refined product – more akin to the M. I have not noticed any significant differences in write time or buffer between the X2 and 113. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wda Posted October 30, 2014 Share #5 Posted October 30, 2014 I value this early feedback. Against the odds, I still enjoy the performance and compactness of my X1 which, even with hand-grip attached, slips into most of my out-and-about clothing pockets. This enables me to fit in some useful unscheduled impromptu photography which would have gone unseen and unrecorded with a bigger camera (left at home). At first I welcomed a faster lens. However, until I handle one, I am not currently convinced that I want to sacrifice the features I so like on my X1. I am not oblivious to the slowness of AF or write times. For most of my photography they are not critical issues. Whereas the discreteness and compact size of the X1 permit me to work, largely unnoticed, in many public places. Even when I added the more flexible X Vario to my everyday kitbag, the X1 is included for its singular virtues. All of this would be invalid if the results were not exceedingly good for its slower Elmarit lens. No, the X1 will be a long-term keeper even if I eventually succumb to the lure of the latest Leica X. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
colonel Posted October 30, 2014 Share #6 Posted October 30, 2014 I agree that the X2 seems only slightly smaller but is in fact a fair bit more compact. The 113 is like carrying a CSC rather then a compact. I agree with all said above, just want do add that I think the AA filter on the 113 is weaker then that on the X2, which is significant for me. But as I don't have a 113 yet this is only based only on files I have downloaded from the web, incidental comments and experience of the XV which definitely has a weaker AA then the X2 If a key decision is the lens, it also looks like this is a significant upgrade. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.