Leica X1 or Ricoh GXR

[markpsf]

Apologies to those who've read a similar entry on the Leica forum.


I want another first rate reasonably small camera that will be great for closeup street shooting, has first-rate easy manual control for zone focusing and quick shooting, and a first rate sensor.

I love the focal length of the X1 (35mm is my personal favorite for street shooting) and some of the retro controls. Additionally, to my non pro eyes the images look good. My hesitancy relates to reports (Sean Reid's review in particular) of problems with manual focus controls. If those problems are addressed and solved my decision might be easy. But it appears to be a big "IF".

The GXR has the advantage of an apparently good electronic viewfinder and some reports that indicate good manual focus controls. The A12 apparently also has produced excellent images. It's also larger and I have some niggling concern re the absence of image stabilization. I have a slight hand tremor at times and it's a close call re whether the good high ISO quality plus the medium fast lens will be enough with a 50mm lens.
No problem for me with that with the GRD III with a wider and faster lens.


So I'm undecided.

Your thoughts appreciated.

Mark

 

[DougFord]

[FONT=&quot]Without some comprehensive testing/reviews of both cameras it’s really too early to make an informed decision.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Both cameras , from early impressions, will have excellent image quality. [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]The AF on both cameras seems highly suspect at this time. Perhaps Panasonic is the only company that can produce acceptable AF speeds using the contrast detect method. Bodes well for a 2010 release of a FF GF1.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]If Ricoh or Leica can’t produce acceptable AF speeds then the intuitive nature and operability of the manual focus feature will be paramount. At first blush it seems that the Ricoh has the edge on the leica with regards to the manual focus UI.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]A more informed decision will be possible within a months’ time as these camera’s get vetted and their quirks become known.[/FONT]

 

[Mackinaw]

Who knows? My advice is to wait until both cameras are being produced and sold, then go out and try one yourself. Every test you read now is based on pre-production cameras with not-up-to-date firmware. Very hard to make an informed decision until final production cameras become available.

Jim B.

 

[markpsf]

Response

Response

Given my impatient nature I "hate" both of these responses!🙄

Given the importance of not making a foolish decision and of choosing a camera that feels just right for me, your comments make perfect sense.

Unfortunately, I won't be able to easily test out each one, though returns are always possible for a small fee. Again though, that makes sense to me.
Example...great reviews for the Canon S90...good controls...played with one for a half hour and hated how it worked with my fairly large hands and long fingers.

But if any of you have actually handled one or both, please chime in!

Mark

 

[jsrockit]

Ok...

Do you want a digital camera that is designed like a classic camera with a no nonsense approach while keeping the camera small? Do you want a 35mm equiv lens?

YES? Then you want the Leica.

Do you want larger camera with a different lens length than 35mm, but is designed more like a modern digital camera (i.e. less classic design)?

Yes? Then the Ricoh is for you.

My choice... Leica X1. You could also pray that Ricoh makes a GRD IV!

 

[BillBingham2]

Mark,

While I do not have a GXR, I do have a GRD III and a GX100. Manual focus on any P&S if you do not do a zone focus thing is not as easy as on say an M2 or a S3 (Nikon that is). I have not seen the X-1's users manual so I can not comment on it at all. I can say that the GRD III as about as easy a set up as you will find. I use user settings to allow me to switch between focus points quickly. Each of the three settings has the same base, only difference is the focus points. On the GRD III you have a small suite of settings you can save so I have a lots of light and low light series programmed. IQ (Image Quality) on digital bodies has to do with so many different things it's hard to say bigger sensor will always yield the best results. Might give you a broader range of tonality but I would say take a look around for some samples of RAW images well processed out of the GRD III. The test shots I saw with the GXR vs the X-1 I have to give the nod to the GXR being less splotchy.

The other thing the GXR has is the flexibility to swap out to a different lens/sensor. While I love the 28/1.9 on my GRD III, I know it's too wide for some folks. 50 for me is too long nor not long enough, though handy for macros. The 28 takes great stuff but the 50 on my GX100 is a lot better looking (distortion wise) very close up (and easier with live subjects).

Give Tony a call (Popflash Photo) to check prices on the Ricoh, usually when he has call for prices there is almost always a VERY good reason for the buyer to do so. Tony has treated me very well and with Stephen is on the top of my list for trust. You can get both from him so either way I would strongly recommend him. Another thing is that with many Ricoh cameras he has a try it program to rent one for a period of one week to see if you're happy with it. I have never used it but it's a great idea for folks who are on the fence. I do not see it with the GXR or the X-1 but I would definitely try asking. Worst he can say is no.

While I am a big one lusting for a X-1 sized camera with the controls like an M9, I'm not holding my breath. I got my GRD III about a month before the X-1 was announced. I was sick about it till the covers were lifted on the X-1 and the price finalized. While the dials make it look easier, it's just as easy to deal with the controls on the GRD III. Now, if they has a set of dials like you find on an M or say an OM, I would think differently, but I've adapted to using the GRD pretty quickly. For me the controls on a camera are just as important as the glass or reliability. It's the whole package that floats my boat. Not just he glass or the speed of capture or if it can do HD movies.

Hope this helps.

B2 (;->

 

[aizan]

the only big difference is the lens.

 

[BillBingham2]

Mark,

While not overly large, my hands are larger than average. I never really felt in absolute total head over heals love with the OMs I've owned because of this, but it was true love because of the size. One the Ms that I've owned felt fine as does my S3-2000.

In spite of not loving the OM, I do love my GRD and it's a LOT smaller. The GRX-100 while not much, is larger than the GRD. Down load the manuals and read through them if you haven't.

Another option is to try a GX-200 as I bet it handles just about the same as the GXR and is pretty close in size. I know you can rent them from Tony & Co..

Hope this helps.

B2 (;->

 

[yanidel]

I have handled both and prefer the GXR ergonomy, it fits perfectly in the hand. The viewfinder is truly impressive, much superior to the one on the GF1. With the 50mm lens on, it is is significantly bigger then the X1. Also, I did not find the samples pictures of the X1 to be impressive.
Anyways, I don't plan to buy either of them, I still think that my DP2, despite his quirks, creates images that are stunning and distinctive than other other APS-C systems (at low ISO). I also like a lot the way it operates in manual focus.

 

[markpsf]

Response Update

Response Update

re Pop Flash...They're great.

The fact is that I have a payment already made with them; the question is whether I'll use it for the GXR or X1!

I have the GRD III and like it a lot, but it is apples and oranges for me re the others in terms of sensor size and focal length of the lens.
The fact is that I have more cameras than I need (sound familiar to any of you/).

I'm looking for one with a larger sensor and that provides a good enough antidote to my totally irrational lust for a Leica M camera! I thought the X1 might be it. But now I'm not sure.

As others have advised, waiting for more definitive info, particularly on whether Leica has addressed the manual control issues through a firmware change, seems like the wisest course of action right now.

Mark

 

[BillBingham2]

Mark,

Sell off a few slowly to develop a fund for which ever you run with. Waiting is not a bad choice and as you have enough "Stuff" to keep you busy/happy for a bit.

B2 (;->

 

[markpsf]

Much too rational Bill...and wise.
I will wait.
And cutting back on what I rarely use also makes sense.

BTW, what's an OM? I don't know some of the acronyms you used in your first response.

And thanks for taking the time to help keep me sane! 😱


Mark

Mark,

Sell off a few slowly to develop a fund for which ever you run with. Waiting is not a bad choice and as you have enough "Stuff" to keep you busy/happy for a bit.

B2 (;->

 

[jsrockit]

While I am a big one lusting for a X-1 sized camera with the controls like an M9, I'm not holding my breath.

The X1 is the closest thing to the M9 in a compact camera... It is the only compact camera with a dedicated shutter speed dial and aperture dial. It has a similar menu system to the M9 no???

 

[yanidel]

The X1 is the closest thing to the M9 in a compact camera... It is the only compact camera with a dedicated shutter speed dial and aperture dial. It has a similar menu system to the M9 no???

Not so sure. It does not allow to set the focus distance without looking at the LCD, which the DP2 does through a dial. And IQ wise, the DP2 has much more a M9 sharpness look than the X1 IMO.

 

[gavinlg]

I'd get the x1 over the ricoh. I'd have the Olympus e-p2 over both though. I have an e-p1 and it is a brilliant camera.

 

[jsrockit]

Not so sure. It does not allow to set the focus distance without looking at the LCD, which the DP2 does through a dial. And IQ wise, the DP2 has much more a M9 sharpness look than the X1 IMO.

Well, we haven't seen much output from the X1 yet. A lot of what I see from the DP2 seems dull to my eyes. I'm pretty confident that the X1 will outshine the DP2 easily once they start showing up in users hands. Actually, the X1 allows you to focus using the green LED right under the hotshoe without using the LCD. I know, that isn't what you mean. 🙂

To me, people are being a bit too critical prematurely on the X1. The criticism is based on the price and the fact that most seem to expect a M8 / M9 in a compact camera body. Sure, the $2000 price tag is steep. However, you are paying an early adopter fee for having the first compact camera with a very large sensor, and you are paying the Leica tax on top of that.

To me, most digital cameras do not seem to be designed for photographers... the X1 and the GRD / GXR at least do, despite their perceived short comings.

 

[yanidel]

Well, we haven't seen much output from the X1 yet. A lot of what I see from the DP2 seems dull to my eyes. I'm pretty confident that the X1 will outshine the DP2 easily once they start showing up in users hands. Actually, the X1 allows you to focus using the green LED right under the hotshoe without using the LCD. I know, that isn't what you mean. 🙂

Follow this link and download some of the .dng taken with the X1
http://forum.getdpi.com/forum/showthread.php?t=12487
The pictures themselves are of no interest but zoom in a bit.
I get sharper images and better colors with the DP2 (to my surprise). The bokeh of the X1 looks great though, similar to the 24mm Elmarit on the M8. Above ISO400, the DP2 IQ deteriorates, no question about that, the X1 will beat it in low light.

As for the LED, it is also present on the DP2, but this concerns AF only which I never use. To compare it to the M9, you need to compare the manual focus capability. And to manual focus on the X1, you need the LCD while you don't on the DP2. It makes a whole lot difference IMO if shooting in environments with movements which is typical of rangefinders.

 

[lytton]

If one thinks of how much the Leica CM was new, then the X1 is a real bargain. Even a Contax T3 or T2 when new was close to $1000. I have been dreaming of a camera like the X1 for many years now. Granted, it is not the first with an APS-C size sensor. The Sigma DP-1 was the first. The aperture was too slow and the focal length was too wide. Then the DP-2 came around and was essentially the same camera with a slightly longer and fast lens. Unfortunately, I never picked one up based on the poor low-light performance and slow focusing. I was rather smitten with the idea of the Olympus EP-2, but the specs and the smaller sensor were going away from my ideals.

My only qualm with the X1 is the lack of a built in viewfinder and the ugly pop-up flash.

Oh well, no one's perfect.

A digital Contax T4 or G3 would have been perfect. Way to go Kyocera!

 

[jsrockit]

Ah, I see yanidel.... well, I don't trust those photos to be honest... seem a bit over exposed and I even see a little camera shake in some of them. I will keep my mind open until I see a bunch of people posting images that are actually good photographs. I'm ok with camera being lame...then I won't need to buy one. So I'm not trying to make excuses for Leica. However, I just cannot believe this camera's image quality is as bad as people want to believe.

Yeah, if you are using manual focus, I can't imagine buying the X1. Just use your M9 instead. The X1 is not truly pocketable anyway, so...

 

[jsrockit]

Granted, it is not the first with an APS-C size sensor. The Sigma DP-1 was the first. The aperture was too slow and the focal length was too wide. Then the DP-2 came around and was essentially the same camera with a slightly longer and fast lens.

The APS-C is bigger than the Fervon in the Sigma: