Considering swapping from Fuji to the Q

[Robert M Poole]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Glad to hear I'm misinformed! (about the M9 firmware and support for the M8) There is a lot of Leica bashing on the 'net. 

[CharlesL]

From someone in a similar position, photographing with a Fuji X-Pro1, usually with M-mount and other rangefinder manual focus primes, and very happy with it: Be sure you want the 28mm full-frame perspective. The reviews gush over growing into it, but after looking at a good many photos, I know it could not be my main mode of view.

 

A Fuji X-Pro2 is expected in four to seven months. It will be interesting to see what Fujifilm does with the combined optical and electronic viewfinder. Then the question would become if and when Leica brings out a Qn at 50mm.

[Advertisement]

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

[IQStreetPhotography]

The good thing about buying Leica is if you don't like it, sell it and you won't loose too much money like you would with a Fuji.

[colonel]

The good thing about buying Leica is if you don't like it, sell it and you won't loose too much money like you would with a Fuji.

Not if you buy new.

You loose a smaller percentage then other brands but as the price is higher it's still a lot.

Buying second hand is often a good idea. Leica digital cameras tend to depreciate in a "step" type curve. If you buy along the step you don't loose money but once a step occurs (between 3 and 12 months) you loose 10-20%.

This is based on my observations of the X and M series since the M8 and X1.

Best rgds

[archi4]

 

Lenses remain, digital bodies have a "best before" date.

The Fui X100 series have a price point where this is acceptable for me.

I'll wait until a "Q" with interchangeable lens mount and maybe a two sensor electronic rangefinder comes along, and then come back to my love of more than 40 years, Leica cameras 

[iTiki]

I'm seriously thinking of sending my X100 to Kolari for an IR conversion. I'll keep my XPro-1 because it still works for me and the resale is so low now it's just not worth selling. I'll keep the XT-1 because it does exposures longer than 30 sec due to the Q being hamstrung to a max 30sec. I'll buy the Q with the knowledge in time I will want the next best thing and will decide at that time if the Q still works for me or if I should sell it for a replacement....

[jaapv]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Leica did quite a few updates for the M9

rgds

With beta testing involving quite a few Forum members

[Robert M Poole]

I went with the m9 in the end and have been happy so far! I'm keeping my xe1 as I've more lenses for it and at the moment my x100. Not for any other reason than I don't want to part with it?

[hirstwithaneye]

I've just reached a similar cross-roads, but have instead sold my X100S after finding a Q in stock at Leica Manchester - all being well it's arriving tomorrow.

 

There aren't any bad choices here IMO if you've got the cash to spend, I personally never fell in love with the Fuji (and the patchy autofocus drove me nuts) and really struggled with choosing new Q over used M.  Maybe next time!

 

Enjoy.

[adampriley]

I've been shooting weddings alongside the xt1. I love the fuji system, but prefer the Af/high ISO and image quality of the Q. Lots of my thoughts here > http://www.adamrileyphotography.com/wedding/leica-q-wedding-photography/

[Robert M Poole]

I've been shooting weddings alongside the xt1. I love the fuji system, but prefer the Af/high ISO and image quality of the Q. Lots of my thoughts here > http://www.adamrileyphotography.com/wedding/leica-q-wedding-photography/

Some fantastic stuff there!

[jankap]

+1

Jan

[wacka]

More like the X100 was the template for the Q.  It's still an incredibly competent camera, and will remain in my mind as the one that created the modern large sensor compact industry.

 

The X1's probably in the corner going "Hello?"

 

The Q is a direct decendant of the X's. It has none of the trinketness of the Fujis, and thankfully no discernible influences from the laughable wannabe M at all, just like the (very flawed) X's before it. The Q just seems to have finally put the really obvious problems with previous X's to rest that now feels like a whole, and not a bunch of surplus bits glued together as an experiment.

 

I kind of enjoy using the X100T in a perverse way though it's never been a viable photographic tool for me due to it's multiple failings, but this is absolutely a gadgetmaker's comedy pastiche of an M, which happens to sell well because it looks like the camera that so many actually want, but can only just about afford in analog form.

 

The Q on the other hand is a distinct product from Leica's rangefinders, both in terms of visual and functional representation.And due to that, it's *miles* better than the X100's, even if it happened to be four times the price.

Edited September 15, 2015 by wacka

[hirstwithaneye]

I went from a Panasonic Lumix GF-1 (only with 40mm equivalent F1.7 lens) to an X100S to a Leica Q - to me they're each progressively better versions of the same category:

 

"once you attach the wonderful 20mm F1.7 pancake it becomes something special; an unobtrusive creative tool that you can carry anywhere, and one that's capable of superb photographic results."

 

All along my full-frame DSLR has sat at home unloved in it's Pelican case ...

[Big T]

I have joined the Leica Q family only a week ago coming from the Fuji X100 & XT1.

 

The Fuji's are awesome cameras but the Leica Q is a step up (Sorry but FF trumps APS-C). Is it worth the $?. I was very nervous handing over the cash for the Q but after using it for a week I have no regrets at all. The Leica Q is just that much better for what I do.

 

I will always keep the X100 (Good as a backup camera) and will hold onto the XT1 for now but may consider selling it down the track.

 

The Leica Q is the camera I have been waiting for and the Fuji's have paved the way to getting there.

[CharlesL]

 

...the trinketness of the Fujis...

 

An understandable, although debatable, evaluation of some Fuji X models, but not the X-Pro1. Solid metal body, good construction, does not bother with video. A successor is expected in the next few months - worth consideration.

 

Samples of M-mount, LTM, and other manual focus primes used on Fuji X may be viewed in my photostream at https://www.flickr.com/photos/41790885@N08/

 

Edited September 16, 2015 by CharlesL

[colonel]

99% of camera swapping is due to boredom

 

I measured this personally and its true

Edited September 17, 2015 by colonel

[Robert M Poole]

99% of camera swapping is due to boredom

 

I measured this personally and its true

Not boredom, I have a medically defined condition... GAS

[cwolffensperger]

Interesting! I've also got a Fuji X-E1 (with quite some Fuji glass), but also quite some Leica glass (for my M3&6). How would you compare the x-e1 to the m9?

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica Q

[Robert M Poole]

Interesting! I've also got a Fuji X-E1 (with quite some Fuji glass), but also quite some Leica glass (for my M3&6). How would you compare the x-e1 to the m9?

I like the stripped down simplicity of the m9. Partly this is because I only have one lens so less choice! (My xe1 I have the 18-55mm, Samyang 12mm and a handful of legacy glass)

 

I find the DNGs need much less work than the Fuji RAFs and I'm often happy with them with only minor tweaks.

 

The Fuji's high ISO is much better imo. The AF on the xe1 and x100 always annoyed me so the lack of it on the m9 doesn't bother me. Though I've quite a few that I've missed focus and not noticed. My fault though not used to the rf focusing.

 

I'm keeping my xe1 for wide angle stuff, the 12mm is great. Macro also, I miss close focusing sometimes.

 

Every now and then I get a picture from The m9 that makes me go wow!