Choosing a Fuji over Leica

My Sony a99 is honestly not much bigger than my M6 if I use a small prime. The image quality is steller, focus peaking and on and on. At half the price. If you have issues much cheaper to have fixed as well. Then there's the D800. Just sayin'.
Don't get me wrong I would love a Monochrome M but the equipment I can get for the same price using other systems.
 
Hi Nico,

You're NOT the first photographer who has grappled with this decision.

I too shot an M body on film (M6), have a 5DmkII, and an X100. So, that's where I'm coming from recently.

I didn't like the X-Pro 1 originally...I played with it for about five minutes in a store. Then a friend of mine bought one. I'm a prime shooter, and he was out with his XP1 and 35/1.4. I was out with my 5DmkII and 50/1.4...so, similar rigs.

His X-Pro 1 grew on me tremendously, especially since I'm already an X100 owner and know how it operates.

My want list was a Leica M-sized body and multiple focal length primes.

My plan this year was to buy a Leica M-E or M9. BUT...the price of admission, besides being patently ridiculous, would make me treat the camera as something more precious than a camera. I'd be so hesitant to travel to non-first world areas, I'd be hesitant about weather, accidents...in short, it was too much money tied up in a small electronic device.

I just purchased an X-Pro 1 body, used, and I'll take delivery next week. A lot of depreciation is gone from the price already, so much like my used M6, I'm much more willing to shoot it as a tool, and not treat it like a diamond necklace, to use when conditions are perfect.

My last thought is this: The M-E and M9, and to much extent the M-Monochrom, are old technology. There is nothing wrong with this. However, to pay such an admission price to get older technology is crazy in my opinion. Even the new M is finally catching up other current cameras in technology, but moves away from it's purist roots. I think the M body heyday was the film Ms. Now, the Leica crown jewels are just the lenses.

Leica Ms are like Ferraris...a terrific and storied reputation, but in it's current form has very little in common with traditional Ferraris of old. The X-Pro 1 is like the Nissan GT-R...filled with technology, cutting edge, similar performance, and one-third the price (but still exotic-enough).

I can't push either one to it's limits...they're both better than my driving will allow...so am I missing anything?

The Fuji image quality is terrific, the handling and OVF are RF-like. Now, it's time for me to quit worrying and go out and make some great pictures.
 
NicoM said:
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.
Click to expand...

try the x-e1...a great size for carrying everywhere!
 
digitalintrigue said:
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.
Click to expand...

I will tend to agree w/ u hear.. Never found any of the issues that he came up w... But I want to put my 2 cents in here, not due to your comments, but as a stepping stone...

I read a lot of the blogs like this, but at the end of the day I take it with a certain grain if salt as they say. They give insight, but does not make them right or wrong. At the end of the day, one needs to decide if the blog writer matches the way I would have evaluated if u did it yourself. And "nothing" can replace the simple task of going to a camera store w/ an sd card to try the demo or to rent that camera to c if it us right for u.

For me, the only results that count is does look good enough when I print at 13x19, my max print size. In the past I have had both 35 crons (v4 and asph). Yes the asph is razor sharp, but u know what, I actually like the look of the v4 much better. The lens (v4), a lot of Leica folks look down on. I think the asph may be a little tooo sharp for my taste.

What I am trying to say is all this testing provides some help in the analysis, but u need to judge for yourself...

What may be good for me is crap to another person...
Gary
 
back alley said:
try the x-e1...a great size for carrying everywhere!
Click to expand...

The X-E1 is actually tempting me more than the X-P1! The size looks like it wouldn't be an issue at all carrying it around! Do you feel that the quality of the LCD of the X-E1 an issue? Also, do the OVF and EVF shooting experience have a huge difference?
 
David_Manning said:
Hi Nico,

You're NOT the first photographer who has grappled with this decision.

I too shot an M body on film (M6), have a 5DmkII, and an X100. So, that's where I'm coming from recently.

I didn't like the X-Pro 1 originally...I played with it for about five minutes in a store. Then a friend of mine bought one. I'm a prime shooter, and he was out with his XP1 and 35/1.4. I was out with my 5DmkII and 50/1.4...so, similar rigs.

His X-Pro 1 grew on me tremendously, especially since I'm already an X100 owner and know how it operates.

My want list was a Leica M-sized body and multiple focal length primes.

My plan this year was to buy a Leica M-E or M9. BUT...the price of admission, besides being patently ridiculous, would make me treat the camera as something more precious than a camera. I'd be so hesitant to travel to non-first world areas, I'd be hesitant about weather, accidents...in short, it was too much money tied up in a small electronic device.

I just purchased an X-Pro 1 body, used, and I'll take delivery next week. A lot of depreciation is gone from the price already, so much like my used M6, I'm much more willing to shoot it as a tool, and not treat it like a diamond necklace, to use when conditions are perfect.

My last thought is this: The M-E and M9, and to much extent the M-Monochrom, are old technology. There is nothing wrong with this. However, to pay such an admission price to get older technology is crazy in my opinion. Even the new M is finally catching up other current cameras in technology, but moves away from it's purist roots. I think the M body heyday was the film Ms. Now, the Leica crown jewels are just the lenses.

Leica Ms are like Ferraris...a terrific and storied reputation, but in it's current form has very little in common with traditional Ferraris of old. The X-Pro 1 is like the Nissan GT-R...filled with technology, cutting edge, similar performance, and one-third the price (but still exotic-enough).

I can't push either one to it's limits...they're both better than my driving will allow...so am I missing anything?

The Fuji image quality is terrific, the handling and OVF are RF-like. Now, it's time for me to quit worrying and go out and make some great pictures.
Click to expand...

Exactly my thoughts as well! I was eyeing a digital M, and the Fuji X cameras are the only alternative that I feel will relieve me of Leica Lust and spend more time shooting! I'm still a student and the money saved by going the Fuji route could be put towards my other priorities or saved for the future.
 
NicoM said:
The X-E1 is actually tempting me more than the X-P1! The size looks like it wouldn't be an issue at all carrying it around! Do you feel that the quality of the LCD of the X-E1 an issue? Also, do the OVF and EVF shooting experience have a huge difference?
Click to expand...

the x-e1 evf is great to work with...the rear lcd works fine for me, and i use it quite a bit.
having moved from using rangefinders to the fuji i started out using the optical finder pretty much all the time at first (on x-p1) and i loved it...but then i started to use the evf just to see what it was like and i like it alot...i haven't used the ovf in a while now.
i like both cameras and could live with either one alone without problem...but the truth is the smaller body is much more comfortable to me.
 
Leica had to shift the outcoming of the new M a few months (now awaited in May) and the current M's are rapidly loosing their value, therefore it seems more a question of whether to buy a second hand M9 or M9P or go for the Fuji.

pro's for the Fuji:
1. newer sensor technology;
2. works great with the new Fuji lenses;
3. low price and therefore less depreciation (in absolute figures);
4. smaller and less weight than the digital Leica's.

cons:
1. evf makes it harder to focus manual lenses;
2. bad corners when using wideagle lenses (still a point I have to figure out myself, but it seems the Fuji's are really giving not so good results compared to the Leica's) in tests they called it smeared corners etc.

conclusion seems to be: the Fuji's seems really good when using native lenses, but are lacking quality when using other - manual - lenses like those of Leica, Zeiss and others.

I have quite a collection of Leitz lenses and I'm still so not sure whether I could use them with good results on these Fuji's. Would like to see more tests or experiences in this respect.
 
What's PDA?
bwcolor said:
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.
Click to expand...
 
Equipped with fast enough lenses, an APS-C camera can match the DOF of a 24x36 mm sensor with a slightly slower lens. Obviously a f 1.4 lens on a 24x36 mm sensor camera would be expensive to beat with an APS-C camera as far as DOF goes. The way I think about is my Fujinon 35/1.4 is functionally equivalent to a 50/1.8 lens on a 24x36 mm sensor. So if the DOF characteristics of a 50/1.8 on a full frame camera work for you, the sensor size differerence is irrelevant.

Speaking of the 35/1.4, the optical, and construction quaility combined with it's weight and size are are unbeatable at that price.

The change in contrast viewed in the EVF referred to in the excellent link Bar8barian shared as a manual focusing aid is real. In fact some people actually adjust the in-camera jpeg rendering parameters to strange values to amplify this focusing effect. Because these parameters are usually useless for viewing and printing, they usually shoot raw so the odd jpeg rendering is moot. Even jpeg shooters benefit because the Fuji lets you generate different jpeg renderings post acquisition before you export the images. But there is an extra step involved.

It's interesting that longer focal lengths, where the DOF is narrower and focus is more critical, are easier to focus in the EVF compared to short focal length lenses. The deeper DOF with short focal lengths compensates for the loss of focus contrast.

I use the 3 or 10 X electronic zoom when time permits or when focus is critical.
 
cosmonaut said:
My Sony a99 is honestly not much bigger than my M6 if I use a small prime.
Click to expand...

Hmmm ... Not sure how we got to comparing the a99 to the legendary M6, but, to me, the size differences are substantial ...

Dimensions of the M6: 138 x 77 x 38. Weight=560 grams.
Dimensions for the a99: 147 x 111.2 x 78.4. Weight=812 grams.
 
In my case it was the Ricoh GXR-M that won me over. I tried my hand at an M8 and quickly sold it, the image quality was real good but I could not get over the handling of the thing, and the filters. Sharing the lenses between the M8 and an M3 was a pain, kept screwing them on and off.

the GXR with M mount is so good, I'll probably buy another one for backup and shoot those babies for years to come. No digital Leica for me. Even more, as of today I am no longer the owner of any Leica M gear, expect for a single LTM-to-M adapter so I can use my lovely LTM lenses on the GXR:cool:
 
what's the consensus on scale focusing with the x-pro1? can you go from one distance to another by feel at a moment's notice? or is the autofocus fast enough not to get in the way?
 
David_Manning said:
My last thought is this: The M-E and M9, and to much extent the M-Monochrom, are old technology. There is nothing wrong with this. However, to pay such an admission price to get older technology is crazy in my opinion.
Click to expand...
It is unfortunate to many of us that Leica is so expensive. But I don't think it is crazy to pay for whatever works the best for you. At that point it is a question of can you afford it or not.
 
aizan said:
what's the consensus on scale focusing with the x-pro1? can you go from one distance to another by feel at a moment's notice? or is the autofocus fast enough not to get in the way?
Click to expand...
Not by feel, but there is a software scale for scale focusing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom