X Type 113 vs T & 23mm

[ropo54]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Don't know about X1. I had the X2 and when compared to X Vario its only advantage is the compactness. True it is one stop faster, but you probably won't like the image shot at f/2.8 and at f/4 the XV produces better images.

Not making a comparison to the X Vario, but I have gotten some terrific images with the X2 at f/2.8

[Advertisement]

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

[robert blu]

Interesting read thanks everybody, I'm thinking to buy a T+23 to substitute (or better to put on the side) of my X1. Two reasons: hopefully a quicker autofocus and possibility to have a medium tele on it when necessary, in fact I think I'll use one of my M lenses (35 or 50 cron). I think also IQ of the T+23 should be slightly better than the one of my X1 (which is not bad at all).

robert

[gbealnz]

It's a shame we can't meet up Robert. I have shortlisted my gear and will bring the X1 as a backup, along with the X-Vario, and the T, (with 28/35/50 lenses).

Gary

[BBHewee]

I'm a M owner who replaced his side X1 by a X, which I then replaced with a T with a 23mm. And I am very happy I made the switch. The T just feels like a more complete camera, more adaptive and just more thought out. IQ is outstanding and using the M lenses I own on it is a big plus. I'm now buying the two larger zooms to turn it into my travel system. The whole thing will fit a small Billingham that I can stash at the bottom of my carry on, and I won't have to wonder whether I'm carrying the right lenses when traveling to a new place.

[freitz]

This is interesting. I just purchased a used x2 because I couldn't find much of a difference between the T-23 and the x2 in quality.

 

Not sure if I agree with c4change about the XV producing better images.

[asiafish]

This is interesting. I just purchased a used x2 because I couldn't find much of a difference between the T-23 and the x2 in quality.

 

Not sure if I agree with c4change about the XV producing better images.

I own both the X 113 and the X Vario.  The X Vario does not produce better images, it produces images of identical quality.  That said, they have different looks (zoom at 23mm on the XV) due to the different optical characteristics of their lenses.

 

At 23mm (35mm full-frame equivalent) the X Vario has a maximum aperture of f/4, so obviously it won't give the same selective focus effects that the X can give at wider apertures.  Even when the X  is stopped down, the lens has a very different look, with a slightly sharper center and slightly softer corners than the X Vario's zoom at the same focal length and aperture.  I think that the X Vario's zoom lens at the same settings (f/4 or f/5.6) is technically better than the X's prime, but, and its a big but, for shooting images of people the X has a more flattering and cinematic look.  By f/8 both are equally sharp over the entire frame, though the X Vario still has a more perfect render, while the X has a more flattering render.

 

Generally at this focal length I prefer the X for people and the X Vario for architecture and objects.

 

Of course the X Vario has a zoom lens and will do things that the X will not.  While the X brings wide aperture and reasonably shallow depth of field (equivalent to a 35mm f/2.5 on full-frame), the X Vario goes out to 1mm (28mm equivalent) and in to 46mm (70mm equivalent).  At its 46mm the X Vario lens is at f/6.4, but still has similar (very slightly deeper) depth of field to the X at f/2.8, but the X Vario focuses closer and at higher magnification.  The X Vario makes a decent portrait camera if you can put some distance between your subject and the background or if you don't need your background completely blurred (often better to have recognizable background anyway).  The X Vario is also an outstanding camera for macro photography, particularly when used with +5 or +10 close up lenses attached to the filter thread (I use a B+W +5).  Of course the X will also focus close and uses the same close up lenses, its just that the X Vario does this far better.

 

I had an X2 before, and I do believe that the X Vario (and the X) has a better lens than the X1/X2.  It not only focuses MUCH closer, but it is not that much slower (1 stop at 23mm) and I believe is optically better.  Either way, all of the Leica X cameras are outstanding as I am sure the T with 23mm is as well.  I would be happy to own any of them, and like them so much that on business (non photography) trips the X is the only camera I bother to carry, leaving my M-E and M Monochrom with their wonderful lenses at home.

 

YMMV

[Guest DrPix]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I absolutely agree, 200%, with all you wrote - having both XVario and X and loving them!

I own both the X 113 and the X Vario.  The X Vario does not produce better images, it produces images of identical quality.  That said, they have different looks (zoom at 23mm on the XV) due to the different optical characteristics of their lenses.

At 23mm (35mm full-frame equivalent) the X Vario has a maximum aperture of f/4, so obviously it won't give the same selective focus effects that the X can give at wider apertures.  Even when the X  is stopped down, the lens has a very different look, with a slightly sharper center and slightly softer corners than the X Vario's zoom at the same focal length and aperture.  I think that the X Vario's zoom lens at the same settings (f/4 or f/5.6) is technically better than the X's prime, but, and its a big but, for shooting images of people the X has a more flattering and cinematic look.  By f/8 both are equally sharp over the entire frame, though the X Vario still has a more perfect render, while the X has a more flattering render.

Generally at this focal length I prefer the X for people and the X Vario for architecture and objects.

 

Of course the X Vario has a zoom lens and will do things that the X will not.  While the X brings wide aperture and reasonably shallow depth of field (equivalent to a 35mm f/2.5 on full-frame), the X Vario goes out to 1mm (28mm equivalent) and in to 46mm (70mm equivalent).  At its 46mm the X Vario lens is at f/6.4, but still has similar (very slightly deeper) depth of field to the X at f/2.8, but the X Vario focuses closer and at higher magnification.  The X Vario makes a decent portrait camera if you can put some distance between your subject and the background or if you don't need your background completely blurred (often better to have recognizable background anyway).  The X Vario is also an outstanding camera for macro photography, particularly when used with +5 or +10 close up lenses attached to the filter thread (I use a B+W +5).  Of course the X will also focus close and uses the same close up lenses, its just that the X Vario does this far better.

I had an X2 before, and I do believe that the X Vario (and the X) has a better lens than the X1/X2.  It not only focuses MUCH closer, but it is not that much slower (1 stop at 23mm) and I believe is optically better.  Either way, all of the Leica X cameras are outstanding as I am sure the T with 23mm is as well.  I would be happy to own any of them, and like them so much that on business (non photography) trips the X is the only camera I bother to carry, leaving my M-E and M Monochrom with their wonderful lenses at home.

YMMV

[rjans]

I absolutely agree, 200%, with all you wrote - having both XVario and X and loving them!

 

+ 1

 

Best