dkCambridgeshire Posted November 12, 2009 Share #121 Posted November 12, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) I've actually been thinking about buying one of these after I sold my Leica MP to a friend on a trip back home. Then, coming back from the trip I found that I connected more with film than digital, just shoot, process, admire and be done with, so I went and bought another Leica MP with Summicron 35 Asph. As always, it's a budget issue of wants and needs. If I had the X1, would I be tempted to cover the screen with a piece of card board and buy a finder to shoot it like an M, maybe... I've still got a Canon 20D being underused, but thinking about the massive depreciation and headaches of having to use a computer to process every image (I'm a C# programmer), I think I'll hold off a while. Think about it, when Digital watches came from Japan, Swiss watch makers almost went extinct, but nowadays digital watches are worth nothing. A rather dogmatic statement ... Have you seen the prices of used Rolex Oysterquartz? You'd be lucky to find one in a dealer's window for less than £2K . Cheers dunk Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted November 12, 2009 Posted November 12, 2009 Hi dkCambridgeshire, Take a look here Why Are There So Many Negative Thoughts About the X1?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
barjohn Posted November 12, 2009 Share #122 Posted November 12, 2009 Have read the Reid review the camera image quality is going to be excellent any minor problems will be sorted by firmware ajustments my order for one still stands First, you are seeing images that Sean has tweaked, not images straight out of the camera. Many of us are not that good in PP so unless you know you are you shouldn't assume you will get similar results. Second, you are only seeing very small images mostly shot at f8 where focus is not critical and it has been carefully PP. Third, it took Leica over two years to get the M8 firmware to acceptable though not perfect levels so son't assume it will happen either before you get the camera or shortly thereafter. The problems described aren't minor. In fact many of the problems described are similar to the problems attributed to the Sigma DP1, DP2 and even DPs. As a result the camera has never been the success it could have been. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Douglasco Posted November 13, 2009 Share #123 Posted November 13, 2009 To me my Digilux 2 is slow to focus and sometimes when I focus on someone the person standing behind is more in focus, Also there is a shutterlag with it as well, mainly when I use the EVF. But I have had some excellent photographs with that camera. So I am hoping the X1 will be a slight improvement on that camera regarding speed of focusing and I hope to get a big improvement on image quality. I agree with your point about PP I am totaly useless and I have to rely on good images straight from the camera. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sean_reid Posted November 13, 2009 Share #124 Posted November 13, 2009 First, you are seeing images that Sean has tweaked, not images straight out of the camera. Many of us are not that good in PP so unless you know you are you shouldn't assume you will get similar results. Second, you are only seeing very small images mostly shot at f8 where focus is not critical and it has been carefully PP. Third, it took Leica over two years to get the M8 firmware to acceptable though not perfect levels so son't assume it will happen either before you get the camera or shortly thereafter. The problems described aren't minor. In fact many of the problems described are similar to the problems attributed to the Sigma DP1, DP2 and even DPs. As a result the camera has never been the success it could have been. Hi John, (I've been writing a lot to you lately. <G>) I understand your point but let me add the following. For the general illustration pictures, the adjustments are mostly made directly in C1 and they're not very dramatic. I didn't need to do much to these afterwards in PS at all. Even the straight conversions in C1 (default settings except noise sliders zeroed) looked quite good. When the controlled test (IQ/ISO noise) test pictures come in they'll be, as always, converted at default settings with only WB sampled for the WhiBal cards and NR zeroed. I appreciate your comments on my digital printing skills but the files straight from the X1 also do look quite good. Some may prefer the C1 conversions seen in my review to some of the ACR conversions just because of C1. Of course, each RAW converter gives its own look. Cheers, Sean Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
nhabedi Posted November 13, 2009 Share #125 Posted November 13, 2009 A rather dogmatic statement ... Have you seen the prices of used Rolex Oysterquartz? You'd be lucky to find one in a dealer's window for less than £2K . I'm not an expert on watches, so I had to Google for "Rolex Oysterquartz". What I see there is definitely not a digital watch... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jsrockit Posted November 13, 2009 Share #126 Posted November 13, 2009 I'm not an expert on watches, so I had to Google for "Rolex Oysterquartz". What I see there is definitely not a digital watch... Me neither...but, A quartz clock is a clock that uses an electronic oscillator that is regulated by a quartz crystal to keep time. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dkCambridgeshire Posted November 13, 2009 Share #127 Posted November 13, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) I'm not an expert on watches, so I had to Google for "Rolex Oysterquartz". What I see there is definitely not a digital watch... My error ...for some reason I read and confused 'digital' with 'quartz'. Apologies dunk Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
nhabedi Posted November 13, 2009 Share #128 Posted November 13, 2009 Me neither...but, A quartz clock is a clock that uses an electronic oscillator that is regulated by a quartz crystal to keep time. Very clever. Be assured that I know what a Quartz clock is, I wasn't born yesterday. If you look at what I was replying to you'll note that it was about digital watches, though, and the Rolex in questions isn't one. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jsrockit Posted November 13, 2009 Share #129 Posted November 13, 2009 Very clever. Be assured that I know what a Quartz clock is, I wasn't born yesterday. If you look at what I was replying to you'll note that it was about digital watches, though, and the Rolex in questions isn't one. Relax fool... I was on your side... I thought maybe he meant that electronic and digital were synonymous. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tategoi Posted November 16, 2009 Share #130 Posted November 16, 2009 This will be my first Leica if I do get one. I guess I will love it for being compact (everyday and every-moment camera), for having APS-C (associated with great IQ), and being a fixed lens (not concerned with using the wrong lens), and lastly, being a LEICA. But I do have a wish list, which is a faster lens, a f1.7 or f1.4 would be perfect, even if the X1 will cost more. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jsrockit Posted November 16, 2009 Share #131 Posted November 16, 2009 But I do have a wish list, which is a faster lens, a f1.7 or f1.4 would be perfect, even if the X1 will cost more. It would probably make the unit as a whole bigger as well though... f/2 would have been a good compromise. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wda Posted November 23, 2009 Share #132 Posted November 23, 2009 It would probably make the unit as a whole bigger as well though... f/2 would have been a good compromise. I agree that a faster lens would have its uses; however, given the good performance at modestly high ISO settings, a great deal can be done with f/2.8. Time will tell, but I think it is an excellent compromise between weight, bulk, shape, performance and cost. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jsrockit Posted November 23, 2009 Share #133 Posted November 23, 2009 I agree that a faster lens would have its uses; however, given the good performance at modestly high ISO settings, a great deal can be done with f/2.8. Time will tell, but I think it is an excellent compromise between weight, bulk, shape, performance and cost. I agree... but others are "bokeh" freaks. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted November 23, 2009 Share #134 Posted November 23, 2009 24/2.8 on APS-C has roughly the same DoF as 28/2.8 on full frame. Difficult to isolate subjects with anything else than close-ups then. Reason when i use the Summicron 28 much more than the Elmarit personally. Now why buying FF or APS if we don't like bokeh? A good 4/3 or small sensor camera would be more adequate no? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.