perudo
Established
hello,
I am thinking about switching to digital, but I will keep my film leicas
Anyway, the M9 is too expensive for me , M8 too outdated, so I'm looking at the Fujis (x-pro or x-e1)....
If I switch to Fuji, I would use my leica lenses...(c-biogon 35 2.8, summicron 50).
So, is there anybody here using those camera bodys exclusively with m-lenses and manual focusing?
I am thinking about switching to digital, but I will keep my film leicas
Anyway, the M9 is too expensive for me , M8 too outdated, so I'm looking at the Fujis (x-pro or x-e1)....
If I switch to Fuji, I would use my leica lenses...(c-biogon 35 2.8, summicron 50).
So, is there anybody here using those camera bodys exclusively with m-lenses and manual focusing?
YYV_146
Well-known
If you are only shooting in manual the X-e1 is the better camera. The Xpro1's evf is lacking in terms of resolution and its OVF is useless for adapted lens. I pair an X-E1 with the NEX-7 for all of my manual lens, they compliment each other in a variety of ways.
The summicron is going to be a solid performer on Fujis, but I am afraid the c-biogon might be slightly disappointing. Wide Biogons are better on an X-E1 than on Sony's bodies, but there would likely still be corner smearing and colors towards the extreme edges.
The summicron is going to be a solid performer on Fujis, but I am afraid the c-biogon might be slightly disappointing. Wide Biogons are better on an X-E1 than on Sony's bodies, but there would likely still be corner smearing and colors towards the extreme edges.
awilder
Alan Wilder
You won't be disappointed but you may want to wait for the next generation of X series IL bodies that should incorporate the split image MF aid from their fantastic X100S. I suspect early next year or sooner considering digital technology being what it is.
thegman
Veteran
I'd probably give the M8 or RD-1 some more thought. Sure, the specs look bad compared to what you can buy now, but they were perfectly good cameras when they were released, and remain that way now. If you only print up to say 10x8", I think either is plenty good enough. And of course you get a real range finder.
RD-1 prices are extremely compelling right now, I don't use digital at all, but I'm still tempted with some of the Epson prices.
RD-1 prices are extremely compelling right now, I don't use digital at all, but I'm still tempted with some of the Epson prices.
NicolasCooper
Member
Depends on what you want
Depends on what you want
As a film Leica user I bought the x-e1 to use it with a 35/2 ASPH and 50 summilux e43... I was not disappointed. But then I bought fuji's excellent 35/1.4 and 18/2 and realised that manual focus on the x-e1 is just not as quick/ intuitive as the rangefinder, or the autofocus. So for me the autofocus is what works best for me with the x-series.
But the quality problems with wide angle-m lenses is the general deal breaker concerning the use of m-lenses only.
Depends on what you want
As a film Leica user I bought the x-e1 to use it with a 35/2 ASPH and 50 summilux e43... I was not disappointed. But then I bought fuji's excellent 35/1.4 and 18/2 and realised that manual focus on the x-e1 is just not as quick/ intuitive as the rangefinder, or the autofocus. So for me the autofocus is what works best for me with the x-series.
But the quality problems with wide angle-m lenses is the general deal breaker concerning the use of m-lenses only.
Steve George
Established
This is the route I've gone - I've kept my M6 but have recently started using an X-E1 with 35mm Summicron (v3), 50mm Summicron and 90mm tele-elmarit. Totally manual focus, cheap adapter from ebay. I love it. I find critical focus hard wide open even with the focus peaking but at f4 the lenses look glorious, sharpness is great and OOF areas enough.
cidereye
Film Freak
Route I went sort of, tried the XE-1 and much preferred the X-Pro1 body size when compared to an M6. That said I will probably get an XE-1 for a 2nd body soon enough.
My heart will always prefer my M6 over any digital body though and that for me is always the continuing dilemma. I had the same battle with M6 v M8. Then M6 v NEX-7 and now the X-Pro1 which is easily the best of the bunch but nothing will take the place in my heart that the Leica does ..... Well apart from my other M6. The Mamiya 6 that is.
That's just me though and my seemingly never ending inward film v digital battle. YMMV of course.
My heart will always prefer my M6 over any digital body though and that for me is always the continuing dilemma. I had the same battle with M6 v M8. Then M6 v NEX-7 and now the X-Pro1 which is easily the best of the bunch but nothing will take the place in my heart that the Leica does ..... Well apart from my other M6. The Mamiya 6 that is.
That's just me though and my seemingly never ending inward film v digital battle. YMMV of course.
Ryan1938
Established
I went from shooting a Leica M6 and M8 to shooting with a M6 and X-pro 1. Here are my thoughts:
1. Relative to the M8, the Fuji is incomparable. While focusing manual glass with the Fuji isn't quite as natural as it is with the M8, it's damn close with the new focus peaking feature. Image quality is better with the Fuji in just about every condition to my eye... The Fuji is just a better camera.
2. Comparing the M6 and Fuji isn't so cut and dry. I'm a lot faster with my M6 than I am with the Fuji. I can focus, hit the shot, and cock the shutter on the m6 faster than I can focus, hit the shot, and wait for the file to copy to the memory card on the Fuji. I'd say its almost two to one.
That all being said, the Fuji is almost as rewarding to shoot as the M6. The image quality is fantastic and as a film guy, I secretly love to see my photos as soon as I get to my computer rather than waiting on development. And the Leica glass (so long as you don't get too wide) works great on the Fuji.
So, would I sell my M6 for a Fuji? No... I wouldn't. But I do think the Fuji is a great tool to use along side my M6. Other than an M9 or the new M, I don't know that you could do any better as far as usability, feel, etc... I do love the Fuji.
1. Relative to the M8, the Fuji is incomparable. While focusing manual glass with the Fuji isn't quite as natural as it is with the M8, it's damn close with the new focus peaking feature. Image quality is better with the Fuji in just about every condition to my eye... The Fuji is just a better camera.
2. Comparing the M6 and Fuji isn't so cut and dry. I'm a lot faster with my M6 than I am with the Fuji. I can focus, hit the shot, and cock the shutter on the m6 faster than I can focus, hit the shot, and wait for the file to copy to the memory card on the Fuji. I'd say its almost two to one.
That all being said, the Fuji is almost as rewarding to shoot as the M6. The image quality is fantastic and as a film guy, I secretly love to see my photos as soon as I get to my computer rather than waiting on development. And the Leica glass (so long as you don't get too wide) works great on the Fuji.
So, would I sell my M6 for a Fuji? No... I wouldn't. But I do think the Fuji is a great tool to use along side my M6. Other than an M9 or the new M, I don't know that you could do any better as far as usability, feel, etc... I do love the Fuji.
SaveKodak
Well-known
As long as you KEEP YOUR FILM CAMERAS ;-) hellz yes get an X-E1. Save the rest for the X-Pro2. I have a feeling they're gonna knock it outta the park with round 2 of that camera, while their first try was merely a line drive to the outfield. Love the XPro, but like the X100, the 2nd version is perfection.
Of course they could bonk us all on the head with a full frame in a year so you never know. I am not one of those who thinks a full frame is necessary. As long as the lenses are made with the format in mind, and they have so far been doing this.
Of course they could bonk us all on the head with a full frame in a year so you never know. I am not one of those who thinks a full frame is necessary. As long as the lenses are made with the format in mind, and they have so far been doing this.
cosmonaut
Well-known
I think Fuji has the best lens with the X series. You will be very happy.
semilog
curmudgeonly optimist
The 35mm C-Biogon is great on the X-E1; the 21mm is probably not as good (I've had and loved both lenses but I have only shot the 35 on a Fuji).
I think the Fuji 23/1.4 is going to be a landmark lens for the mount and am itching to get my hands on a copy of it.
cosmonaut
Well-known
But with that it may be worth it to wait and see what the new NEX will offer. At least you can have no crop factor and image quality and dynamic range that even the M9 won't have.
semilog
curmudgeonly optimist
If the corners of the frame are problematic with a lens on APS-C, they are going to be dreadful on a FF sensor that is not optimized for non-telecentric lenses. A FF NEX camera may have a better SNR but it's not likely to be a strong performer with legacy lenses, especially with wide angle lenses designed for short flange distances.
Sony is not likely to implement eccentric micro-lenses on the sensor as Leica has done; their primary interest is going to be in selling modern lenses and reinforcing the existing Sony alpha/Minolta-mount SLR system, not in supporting legacy rangefinder glass.
Sony is not likely to implement eccentric micro-lenses on the sensor as Leica has done; their primary interest is going to be in selling modern lenses and reinforcing the existing Sony alpha/Minolta-mount SLR system, not in supporting legacy rangefinder glass.