Jump to content

Leica X-U: Outdoor And Underwater Camera


LUF Admin

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

£2400?! Come on Leica. This needed to be priced slightly above the current X range. Leica's are niche products already but this takes it to a whole new level.

 

They should be consulting consumers rather than Audi by the looks of it. It's a real shame because it's such a missed opportunity.

 

For those asking about price, here's a UK store link: http://www.leicastoremanchester.com/collections/leica-x-u-typ-113/products/leica-x-u-typ-113

Edited by w44neg
Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not for me...defiantly not for me, but I am impressed by Leica's ability to expand their line and create new customers. I wonder how many they expect to sell and if its worth the R&D?

Who of us 5 years ago could have predicted what we are seeing from Leica today.

--

Link to post
Share on other sites

I actually like it. It`s not for scuba divers, but for more rugged outdoors activities. As such it plays nicely into a niche. A camera with good IQ which can take some beating and abuse in the outdoors for activities like parachuting/-gliding, sailing, horseback riding, canoeing, rock climbing.... Is there any alternative?

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

I actually like it. It`s not for scuba divers, but for more rugged outdoors activities. As such it plays nicely into a niche. A camera with good IQ which can take some beating and abuse in the outdoors for activities like parachuting/-gliding, sailing, horseback riding, canoeing, rock climbing.... Is there any alternative?

I don't know any alternative.

 

We use waterproof compacts while boating and canoeing. The Pentax DSLR weatherproofing was not enough for the marine environment as I found out.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

The following is a professional diver's opinion of the camera's underwater capability: 

 

Short answer: would I buy/suggest it for underwater photography? No. 

With a depth rating of 15m it is only really usable for snorkelling and there are many camera/housing/flash combinations available that would give far better results from the surface down to 30m. The inbuilt flash of the Leica would struggle below 5m in anything other than very clear water with bright sunlight and even then it would only cope with close-up work. As a general rule, any camera that is 'waterproofed' will not perform as well as one that is inside a waterproof casing, too much has been compromised with the former. 

I would predict disappointment for photographers using this Leica camera underwater - especially so when they compared their results to those produced by a lot less expensive equipment. 

R

 

  Thus, Leica's marketing blurb which claims that  "It even enables breathtaking underwater moments to be captured in perfect detail at depths of up to 15 metres."  is highly optimistic and misleading.

 

dunk

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

I can only agree fully. On top of that the flash is mounted in a way that can only produce the maximum of backscatter, hiding the subject behind a full blizzard in anything but the very clearest of water.

And has anybody at Leica ever tried to use an LCD back screen whilst underwater? A GoPro with a frame viewfinder and decent off-camera light is far better - and about a fifth of the price.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

dkCambridgeshire, on 20 Jan 2016 - 21:44, said:dkCambridgeshire, on 20 Jan 2016 - 21:44, said:

 

Very expensive …BUT … how much would an underwater housing capable of being used at a depth of 50 ft cost? And there's probably some wiggle room to venture a bit further.  For a Leica product of this type I would not pay £2400 - but I might consider £1800 if I had a use for such a tool camera. 

 

dunk

As an example? 369 Euro for an Ikelite underwater housing for Olympus XZ1 (40 meters)

 

And this is the competition for underwater:

 

http://www.backscatter.com/learn/article/article.php?ID=57

 

IMO Leica does not stand a chance in this discipline.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It isn't claimed to be 'waterproof' it stated to be water-resistant. I haven't seen its water-resistant specification as yet (IP??) but it would be interesting to find out what the sealing system is. Gaskets are ok but I dot consider them to be seriously designed to be actually waterproof and in my experience they will eventually fail if the camera is actually used underwater (unless they are kept scrupulously clean). 'O' rings are far better and can be considered as being a serious attempt to keep water out. Speaking as someone who has taken underwater photographs professionally for over 30 years and as a supplier of very high quality underwater housings, I see such cameras as 'weatherproof' rather than 'waterproof' with all the shifts in potential usage that this implies. At the price I might use one in bad weather but not underwater. An interesting if rather overpriced entry into the 'rugged' camera market - at £1400 less in the UK it might just be a contender as it shoots DNGs but even for Leica its far too much IMO.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If the claim is that it can be used to 15 m, I would suggest that it is waterproof to 15 m. Otherwise CS would be flooded with bodies to pump out under guaranty.

 

I do agree that the camera is more to be used for things like rafting or sailing etc.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

This might be an underwater camera, but it will sink like the proverbial brick. They will have to shave chunks off this price to get it to sell, assuming someone can live with the looks. I really get the protection from the elements idea,but the implication is that it will be carried to more "extreme" places that need this protection. If that's the case, the more "pancake" shaped slower lens from the X2 etc would surely have been so much more appropriate /portable, and maybe improve they should have improved the sensor to one that performs better in low light. It's this idea that's been behind the global success of the go-pro, that is given excellent protection in a waterproof/dust proof case.

On another note I tried to look at an X the other day on a rare trip to New York. The Leica branch in Soho didn't have one ?? and weren't overly interested either. I think it's the only Leica store in New York, and in a very wealthy area by the looks of it. I was the only customer on the place on a bank holiday weekend when other places were dong very nicely thank you. I said it before re the Sony. RX1 , the Q would sell with the 35mm lens rather than the 28. 

Edited by Lee Martin
Link to post
Share on other sites

If the claim is that it can be used to 15 m, I would suggest that it is waterproof to 15 m. 

 

The second digit indicates the level of protection that the enclosure provides against harmful ingress of water.

 

In this case (see below) Leica state the class to be

 

IP 68: so, 'the equipment is suitable for continuous immersion in water under conditions which shall be specified by the manufacturer.'

 

Leica's specification: In compliance with JIS/IEC protection class 68 (IP68) (in accordance with Leica Camera AG testing conditions[1]), allows underwater photography in depths up to 15m / 49ft for max. 60 minutes

[1] These testing conditions do not constitute a blanket warranty in terms of damage or destruction; purely cosmetic damage as a result of the impact test, e.g. damage to the color or deformation and also water tightness after the impact test are not part of the water resistance tests. Water resistance tests do not apply for any other liquids except sweet or salt water, and not for current or jet pressure.

 

To be honest 15m for 60 minutes is a fairly impressive test for IP65 as generally 3m is more often used. But for me the problem is that its effectively a 'passive' test which means that it isn't representative of actual usage with shifting pressures due to motion and other pressure effects. And the claim remains one of water resistance not waterproofness - and it appears that this may be potential invalid if the camera has actually been subjected to an impact! Such cameras can, IMO, be used underwater but in effect this is at the user's risk as proving the cause of ingress afterwards is not an easy thing to do. I must admit that I'd like to see one and read its manual though because somebody has clearly put a lot of thought into the water resistant side of the design.

Edited by pgk
Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not for me...defiantly not for me, but I am impressed by Leica's ability to expand their line and create new customers. I wonder how many they expect to sell and if its worth the R&D?

Who of us 5 years ago could have predicted what we are seeing from Leica today.

--

 

R&D?? A few rubber rings in an X with a sturdier body. The colleagues discussed it at the NewYear's reception you mean

Link to post
Share on other sites

As an example? 369 Euro for an Ikelite underwater housing for Olympus XZ1 (40 meters)

 

And this is the competition for underwater:

 

http://www.backscatter.com/learn/article/article.php?ID=57

 

IMO Leica does not stand a chance in this discipline.

I still think this kind of camera is a great idea for stills. For us doing all kind of outdoor activities (except diving :) ) this is one of the very few. Name me another with fixed lens /1,7 (or better), waterproof without housing, APS-C and decent IQ targeting still photo.

 

The ones in the link above are all tiny sensor cameras that needs housing. And to recommend a GoPro for stills? Come on.

 

Lets just face it, underwater houses are cumbersome, bulky and not very sexy. I would bet that 99% of sold underwater houses after 1 week are kept permanent in a tray, in the bottom of a drawer, in the basement, behind a locked door at the abandoned cabin.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sounds like the marketing is misleading. This is not a professional camera designed exclusively for underwater photography; it's a rugged outdoors camera. That's a smart move, very practical, and with the high quality X-series 35mm-equiv. lens should produce excellent results in the outdoor environment. I've taken the LX5- sea-kayaking and through mountain streams, where I wouldn't take an M camera, pulling it out of its case when needed -- but it fogs up easily and so an alternative waterproof camera -- by whatever brand -- would be ideal. Dust on the sensor of fixed lens cameras is also a reality, especially if you live in a windy environment. Weatherproofing makes a noticeable difference.

 

However, the prices for the X-U are inconsistent, varying by approximately $1,000 whether it is sold in the US or Europe! That makes no sense. Alas, like most new Leica products, we are unlikely to see the X-U on the shelves here in New Zealand for many months. 

Edited by NZDavid
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.

×
×
  • Create New...