NicoM
Well-known
I'm currently in the process of getting rid of some gear to fund a digital M body. After spending a lot of time in forums yesterday, I though about the option of buying a Fuji X-E1 or X-Pro1 instead. I'm wondering if any of your were ever at my position and chose to go with the Fuji instead of the Leica. Any regrets at all?
I understand that they're two totally different cameras in build, function and handeling, but the Fuji X cameras have blown me away with their sensor and lenses.
PS: I'm coming from a Canon 5D Mark II and Leica M3
I understand that they're two totally different cameras in build, function and handeling, but the Fuji X cameras have blown me away with their sensor and lenses.
PS: I'm coming from a Canon 5D Mark II and Leica M3
Bar8barian
Established
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Pablito
coco frío
From my perspective, the current generation of digital M bodies are fundamentally different from the Fuji offerings due to having a full frame sensor. It's not image quality per se that makes this important as the Fuji image quality is superb. It's the depth of field control - the FF camera gives you the option of shallower depth of field should you want it or need it. So the real competition to the M bodies for me is that new Sony with FF and a 35mm lens..
eleskin
Well-known
I upgraded from m8 to X Pro-1
I upgraded from m8 to X Pro-1
I have been shooting rangefinders since 1987, got my first Leica in 1990 (M6) and more recently in 2007, I bought an M8 that has served me very well. I tested the m9 3 times and decided not to buy one in that I thought the performance was too close to my M8 (I thought my M8 files looked sharper too). I fooled around with a Nex 5n and thought it did not equal the M8 in image quality and had a plastic looking high ISO image quality. Enter the X Pro 1. I started to research this camera when the rumors first came out in 2011. In 2012, I had a chance to hold one at a camera store and at first I was not impressed and continued to use the M8. After downloading a few files online, I became increasingly impressed. The straw that broke the camels back was my experience at the Photo Plus Expo in 2012. I went to the Leica booth and had a hands on with the new M. As nice as that camera felt in my hands, I felt the add on EVF was an afterthought and I was disappointed by the LCD quality. Leica would not allow me to put in an SD card to evaluate any images. I walked to the Fuji booth and pulled out my Noctilux f1.0 and wanted to see how it would handle with the X Pro 1 and M adapter. The guys at the Fuji area were extremely accommodating to me and eager to see the Noct work with the X Pro 1. To my amazement, focusing was very easy with the magnification function, and WOW, that LCD really showed off the Noctilux color and bokeh in a very 3D quality. It beat the new M in many ways. There was a wall size print from the X Pro and it blew me away. I was sold! I finally took the plunge in January on that deal from B&H where the body was reduced in price and you can get a lens for half. After shooting with tha camera, my M8 has NOT been in use. It kills the M8 in terms of resolution, white balance, and high ISO. It was easy to learn how to use the camera. So easy that I did not read a word of the owners book to start using the camera. This camera is such a leap above the M8 that it is my opinion it is also superior to the M9 which means it can equal or better the new M!!!!! I am not kidding!!!!! Go get one NOW and you will never go back! It is that good!!!!
ALSO: BUY THE 35 1.4 FIRST!!! It kills my 35 Summicron AND 35mm Nokton!!! It is that good!!!! $300? Leica overcharges horribly for lenses. I will NEVER buy them when Fuji makes lenses that are BETTER and far CHEAPER!!!! It is shocking to come to this conclusion, but my images do not lie! I can see it with over 25 years experience with a darkroom, and then digital. Trust me!!!!! Good luck! Hope I have helped you decide.
I upgraded from m8 to X Pro-1
I have been shooting rangefinders since 1987, got my first Leica in 1990 (M6) and more recently in 2007, I bought an M8 that has served me very well. I tested the m9 3 times and decided not to buy one in that I thought the performance was too close to my M8 (I thought my M8 files looked sharper too). I fooled around with a Nex 5n and thought it did not equal the M8 in image quality and had a plastic looking high ISO image quality. Enter the X Pro 1. I started to research this camera when the rumors first came out in 2011. In 2012, I had a chance to hold one at a camera store and at first I was not impressed and continued to use the M8. After downloading a few files online, I became increasingly impressed. The straw that broke the camels back was my experience at the Photo Plus Expo in 2012. I went to the Leica booth and had a hands on with the new M. As nice as that camera felt in my hands, I felt the add on EVF was an afterthought and I was disappointed by the LCD quality. Leica would not allow me to put in an SD card to evaluate any images. I walked to the Fuji booth and pulled out my Noctilux f1.0 and wanted to see how it would handle with the X Pro 1 and M adapter. The guys at the Fuji area were extremely accommodating to me and eager to see the Noct work with the X Pro 1. To my amazement, focusing was very easy with the magnification function, and WOW, that LCD really showed off the Noctilux color and bokeh in a very 3D quality. It beat the new M in many ways. There was a wall size print from the X Pro and it blew me away. I was sold! I finally took the plunge in January on that deal from B&H where the body was reduced in price and you can get a lens for half. After shooting with tha camera, my M8 has NOT been in use. It kills the M8 in terms of resolution, white balance, and high ISO. It was easy to learn how to use the camera. So easy that I did not read a word of the owners book to start using the camera. This camera is such a leap above the M8 that it is my opinion it is also superior to the M9 which means it can equal or better the new M!!!!! I am not kidding!!!!! Go get one NOW and you will never go back! It is that good!!!!
ALSO: BUY THE 35 1.4 FIRST!!! It kills my 35 Summicron AND 35mm Nokton!!! It is that good!!!! $300? Leica overcharges horribly for lenses. I will NEVER buy them when Fuji makes lenses that are BETTER and far CHEAPER!!!! It is shocking to come to this conclusion, but my images do not lie! I can see it with over 25 years experience with a darkroom, and then digital. Trust me!!!!! Good luck! Hope I have helped you decide.
eleskin
Well-known
My Kit:
My Kit:
This is what I have: What I walk around with.
X Pro 1 body
Really Right Stuff grip (Much better than Fuji, GET ONE!)
Fuji 35 f1.4
Fuji 18-55 Zoom
M adapter
Noctilux f1.0
Think Tank side bag (AWESOME GET ONE).
Thats it, I am in total bliss!!!!
My Kit:
This is what I have: What I walk around with.
X Pro 1 body
Really Right Stuff grip (Much better than Fuji, GET ONE!)
Fuji 35 f1.4
Fuji 18-55 Zoom
M adapter
Noctilux f1.0
Think Tank side bag (AWESOME GET ONE).
Thats it, I am in total bliss!!!!
eleskin
Well-known
Try the 50mm f1.5 Zeiss Sonnar too!
Try the 50mm f1.5 Zeiss Sonnar too!
I know I mentioned my Noctilux. Actually, a better buy is the Zeiss 50mm f1.5 Sonnar. It blew me away when I tested it with my M8 at bthe Photo Plus Expo. It should work as well if not better with the X Pro 1!
Try the 50mm f1.5 Zeiss Sonnar too!
I know I mentioned my Noctilux. Actually, a better buy is the Zeiss 50mm f1.5 Sonnar. It blew me away when I tested it with my M8 at bthe Photo Plus Expo. It should work as well if not better with the X Pro 1!
Lss
Well-known
If the Fuji has what you want to have (in comparison to Leica), go with it.
For me it's the depreciation. When one buys a $1000 body, even 100% depreciation only costs $1000 and it doesn't happen instantly. When you buy an M9, you've lost a grand just walking out the door...
APS-C is the new full frame, especially the Xtrans. The difference in shallow DOF is minimal. And if that is really, really super critical, get a Speed Booster and adapt a fast manual focus SLR lens. This way, a 50/1.4 acts exactly like a 50/1.4 on full frame in terms of field of view and DOF.
APS-C is the new full frame, especially the Xtrans. The difference in shallow DOF is minimal. And if that is really, really super critical, get a Speed Booster and adapt a fast manual focus SLR lens. This way, a 50/1.4 acts exactly like a 50/1.4 on full frame in terms of field of view and DOF.
ray*j*gun
Veteran
this seems to be the right place to ask this question......can i use my LTM lenses on the X Pro?
wintoid
Back to film
I have both. I hardly use the Fuji, and just stick to the M9. The reason is mainly handling, and the fact I want to shoot a rangefinder. I have zero complaints about the Fuji build, lens quality or RAW files.
I have not adapted my Leica M lenses. I didn't see any reason to, when the Fuji 35mm is so good.
I have not adapted my Leica M lenses. I didn't see any reason to, when the Fuji 35mm is so good.
daveleo
what?
Fuji digital cameras offer a really fabulous "image quality / $" ratio.
IMO, Leica digital stuff is very overpriced. (Please no quotes and rebuttals, I simply want to put my opinion on the table and leave it here.)
IMO, Leica digital stuff is very overpriced. (Please no quotes and rebuttals, I simply want to put my opinion on the table and leave it here.)
CaptZoom
Established
I think your statement about Fuji digi cameras is spot on. The law of diminishing results is always in play, however, it also means quality continues to get better (but at a much slower rate). That being said, I've yet to handle any camera that surpasses the handling of my Leica, and that is worth the price of entry for me.
To the OP-
Try to rent the Fuji body and see if you're ok with it's quirks. If you are, than I think the decision is pretty easy. The image quality of the Fuji's is not in doubt; it's the handling and operation that is.
I switched from the 5Dmkii to M9 several years ago. I had no complaints about the IQ of the Canon (in fact, the 5D was/is far superior at high ISOs), but for me the interface was horrendous.
GaryLH
Veteran
Yep. Ltm to m adapter just like u would on a Leica. Or direct lym to x mount via third party lens adapter. Fuji has their own m adapter.
Dante Stella wrote it up about maybe Nov or Dec time frame. If I remember correctly, the issue he discovered was that at inf. focus at a certain lens length (I forgot), it focus before inf. all other lens lengths are fine. The biggest advantage of the Fuji adapter is that it allows lens or reaction to come into play just like the Ricoh gxr. It as built in electronics module which limits the diameter of the rear lens element depending on depth. If u plan to use that adapter, u need to go to Fuji site, they have a chart on which lenses work.
The third party lenses, u get what u pay for. Out of 5 or 6 adapters for different ameras to x mount, I have had to shim at leat four to have it perfectly setup for inf.
Gary
bwcolor
Veteran
I can't tell you what to do, but here is how I look at my future camera purchases.
I will buy a camera based upon my needs and if my only need is to have the camera play nice with my 'M' lenses, then the Leica offerings would be at the top of my list.
That said, I thought that the lack of an optical viewfinder would doom my appreciation of the NEX-7, but I found that I adapted and that focus peaking is a rather good focusing technology in reasonably good light and with all but very fast lenses shot at maximum aperture. Lack of focus peaking resulted in my cancellation of the X-Pro1.
I still prefer the X100's viewfinder over OVF. So, my next purchase will be the X100S, in that it provides yet another manual focus option with the introduction of the electronic split screen rangefinder. My wife has the NEX-6 and this has further convinced me to purchase a camera based upon its primary design function, ie. autofocus with system lenses. The advent of PDA has now added another requirement for future purchase and that is that I want fast accurate autofocus should I purchase a system that is designed for autofocus lenses. Given the high quality and great value of the Fuji lenses, this pushes me back towards Fujifilm.
In short, I'm buying an X100s and will not buy a system camera until Fuji introduces PDA, or Sony comes up with a decent range of high quality lenses. One other difference between Sony and Fujifilm's implementation of autofocus is that the Fuji allows for much smaller autofocus areas.
I will buy a camera based upon my needs and if my only need is to have the camera play nice with my 'M' lenses, then the Leica offerings would be at the top of my list.
That said, I thought that the lack of an optical viewfinder would doom my appreciation of the NEX-7, but I found that I adapted and that focus peaking is a rather good focusing technology in reasonably good light and with all but very fast lenses shot at maximum aperture. Lack of focus peaking resulted in my cancellation of the X-Pro1.
I still prefer the X100's viewfinder over OVF. So, my next purchase will be the X100S, in that it provides yet another manual focus option with the introduction of the electronic split screen rangefinder. My wife has the NEX-6 and this has further convinced me to purchase a camera based upon its primary design function, ie. autofocus with system lenses. The advent of PDA has now added another requirement for future purchase and that is that I want fast accurate autofocus should I purchase a system that is designed for autofocus lenses. Given the high quality and great value of the Fuji lenses, this pushes me back towards Fujifilm.
In short, I'm buying an X100s and will not buy a system camera until Fuji introduces PDA, or Sony comes up with a decent range of high quality lenses. One other difference between Sony and Fujifilm's implementation of autofocus is that the Fuji allows for much smaller autofocus areas.
Snowbuzz
Well-known
Hmm, well 'diglloyd' had some weird artifact problems with the X-trans sensor in his Fuji review. I saw the images and, I must say, some truly bizarre stuff there in the close-ups. Then everyone else raves about the image quality, so, go figure. Capture One Pro is still working on refining its RAW processor for the camera.
I've been having a ball with my Leica M8. I tried out the X-Pro1 and didn't like the focusing dance with manual lenses. In the end, ultimate image quality probably comes down the list for me, I guess. Fun using the camera comes much higher up. I've decided that I am going to spend my money and get the new Leica M.
I've been having a ball with my Leica M8. I tried out the X-Pro1 and didn't like the focusing dance with manual lenses. In the end, ultimate image quality probably comes down the list for me, I guess. Fun using the camera comes much higher up. I've decided that I am going to spend my money and get the new Leica M.
GaryLH
Veteran
To the op
In the film days, I was able to shoot w/ a variety of rf cameras Leica m6, CL, CLE, Konica rf, cv bessa rf and canon rf cameras. I never did like the m6 body design when it American to the film loading design. Of all the various rf cameras I played w/ during the film days it was the CL and Konica rf that I used.
To me the m8/9/monochrom/m anything debate comes down to following:
- price of Leica vs Fuji (no brainier for me Fuji won)
- dof (apsc vs ff, for how I shoot, apsc dof good enough, I have canon rf 50f1.2 for portrait work or other areas where I need thinner dof)
- Leica lenses vs Fuji ones. Native lenses w/ af is way to go, if u think u need rf lenses then there is always adaption
- the RF experience, is it what brought u to Leica. Will u miss is going to Fuji. For me never missed it, because Fuji was the first camera company outside of Leica that got it.. Back to basics w/ the control interface plus a great integration w/ ovf/evf/LCD. Hopefully by next generation, the digital split image and focus peaking for the x100s.
- repair ability vs base cost of the camera body... The so called lifetime warrantee from Leica is great, but at end of the day, certain electronic parts are not totally under their control as some m8 owners have experienced w/ their LCD issues. They ran out of third party vendor parts for the lcd. Time will tell on the m9 if they also have any of these issues.
- the monochrom is the most unique camera in their line, the sigma foveon sensors maybe the only ones that can emulate the look..
- Lecia vs fuji look. With the newer CMOS Leicas, I am not sure that the look is there compared to any other Leica.
Anyway just some things to think about. For me given, it was a no brainier, Fuji all the way. I also looked at my max print (13x19) and my normal print size (8x10), decided 16mp was more than enough for me..
Good luck o your decision.
Gary
In the film days, I was able to shoot w/ a variety of rf cameras Leica m6, CL, CLE, Konica rf, cv bessa rf and canon rf cameras. I never did like the m6 body design when it American to the film loading design. Of all the various rf cameras I played w/ during the film days it was the CL and Konica rf that I used.
To me the m8/9/monochrom/m anything debate comes down to following:
- price of Leica vs Fuji (no brainier for me Fuji won)
- dof (apsc vs ff, for how I shoot, apsc dof good enough, I have canon rf 50f1.2 for portrait work or other areas where I need thinner dof)
- Leica lenses vs Fuji ones. Native lenses w/ af is way to go, if u think u need rf lenses then there is always adaption
- the RF experience, is it what brought u to Leica. Will u miss is going to Fuji. For me never missed it, because Fuji was the first camera company outside of Leica that got it.. Back to basics w/ the control interface plus a great integration w/ ovf/evf/LCD. Hopefully by next generation, the digital split image and focus peaking for the x100s.
- repair ability vs base cost of the camera body... The so called lifetime warrantee from Leica is great, but at end of the day, certain electronic parts are not totally under their control as some m8 owners have experienced w/ their LCD issues. They ran out of third party vendor parts for the lcd. Time will tell on the m9 if they also have any of these issues.
- the monochrom is the most unique camera in their line, the sigma foveon sensors maybe the only ones that can emulate the look..
- Lecia vs fuji look. With the newer CMOS Leicas, I am not sure that the look is there compared to any other Leica.
Anyway just some things to think about. For me given, it was a no brainier, Fuji all the way. I also looked at my max print (13x19) and my normal print size (8x10), decided 16mp was more than enough for me..
Good luck o your decision.
Gary
R
rpsawin
Guest
After you have done your on-line research and have some ideas/options as to what you want to do may I suggest you go to a camera store and actually handle the cameras so you can determine the fit & feel of them in your hands.
Had I taken my own advice early on I probably would have save lots of $$$ on purchases that did not really pan out as hoped.
Had I taken my own advice early on I probably would have save lots of $$$ on purchases that did not really pan out as hoped.
diglloyd lost my respect with his Fuji shenanigans, that's really another story.
The RAW situation is ever changing. Personally, never had any issues. It does take an extra step in the work flow but the results and the Fujinon lenses are so good, it's worth it. It also helps that the vast majority of the time RAW is not even needed.
Snowbuzz
Well-known
Oh, cool: always best to go for the 'consensus opinion' then.
At least nowadays we can nitpick about sensor image quality. We didn't have that in the days of yore: it was the same film in the Leica or in the Kodak disposable. But not everyone ended up with a Kodak disposable.
At least nowadays we can nitpick about sensor image quality. We didn't have that in the days of yore: it was the same film in the Leica or in the Kodak disposable. But not everyone ended up with a Kodak disposable.
NicoM
Well-known
Thanks for all of the replies guys! I'm trying to build a kit that will motivate me to go shooting more often. When I was in high school, I took my 5D with me everywhere. I loved it and the pictures I took with it. I still love the files it produces, but I just don't like taking it with me anymore. My M3, on the other hand, goes with me everywhere. I want a digital body that I can take with me when I'm out and about and wont get in my way, and I think the Fuji cameras fit the bill.
My only worry, should I go the Fuji route, is that I'll still lust over a digital M.
My only worry, should I go the Fuji route, is that I'll still lust over a digital M.