Fuji X-Pro or Leica M8

Fuji X-Pro or Leica M8

  • Total voters
    470
If you offered me a M9 or a XP1, I'd jump on the M9 even though there are some advantages to the XP1 IMO.

The M8, though? More expensive, not covered by a warranty plus expensive to repair, usable only with legacy glass which introduces crop factor weirdness, basically limited to 640 ISO and down. Not even a moment's hesitation to say XP1 (or OMD, or almost any contemporary digital to be honest).
 
jsrockit said:
Yes, I think that's the point of the camera... :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

So why compare them. Either you enjoy precise manual focusing with the M8 rangefinder, or you like the rangefinder 'style' photography of the AF Fuji Pro-X1. They're not playing the same sports. I might like both actually :)
 
I would find it unpleasant to give up using ISO 1600 (RAW) with no hesitation. For B&W pushing exposure of the RAW file in post is gets me to an effective ISO 3200. I can print both with no reservations. I really enjoy the benefits of using higher shutter speeds to reduce motion blur. I realize IS is useful too, but that just adds weight, and lowers battery life. Of course the M8 doesn't have IS either.
 
Johann Espiritu said:
I just enjoy photography more then I shoot in manual focus with a true rangefinder. Image quality is second to this great user experience. I grab my Nikon S2 over a Fuji X100 for this precise reason. I'm sure the X-1 Pro will blow the M8's image quality out of the water - but I can't seem to shake my love of using an RF.
Click to expand...

This exactly.

Image quality is only part of the equation. I LOVE the entire shooting experience of my M8. I have no desire to change. I have briefly used an X100 and still think its too complex. I want the straight forward joy of a RF. Unless they make an X-1 Pro an RF then I would still choose an M8.

Recently on a trip I used my Pany G1 instead of my M8 and it was a no fun at all. I missed the simplicity of the M8 from manual focus, tactile lens feel, and the clear uncluttered view finder. I like shooting RF's so until someone comes out with a less expensive digital RF then the M8 is it.
 
Im not sure the Fuji IQ will besignificantly better, or even better, than the M8. I'm still amazed at the quality RAW filesI get from my M8.
 
^-- An awful lot of M users do the majority of their work in zone focus, thereby throwing the oft -purported precision of M focusing straight out the window.

For contemplative work, there's focus shift, field curvature, RF-lens mismatches, the need to focus-recompose for off-center subjects, and the lack of live-view on the M8 and M9, which would allow one to compensate for the vagaries of the Leica focusing system.

The M focus system might be precise, but there are plenty of conditions where it isn't very accurate. And again, I say that as someone who shoots mainly a (film) M. The new mirrorless cameras that use TTL focusing are under many of the same conditions inherently more accurate.

Some M shooters will disagree but I'd respond that if you don't understand the very real limitations of your tools you'll never use them near their technical potential. For some people, that's OK, too. We all have different motivations and answer to different muses. The M's do feel good to use which is why I still haul an M6 around.
 
M8, because I've used several, know them, like the handling, like the output. Like every M body, as others have said above, an M8 feels d**n good in use.

For "contemplative work," sportshooting, specialized lens use, I've got non-RF tools that get it done.

An aside: what is it about the M8 that leads people who've never used the camera to make pronouncements about it?
 
Damaso said:
Until people have actually used it and handled it I don't know how one could make a choice...
Click to expand...

i would base it on money for one...and also the images that i made with the fuji x100...i have handled an m8 and an m9 but that hardly makes me an expert...if i can afford it i would love to keep my rd1 kit and buy the fuji kit as well.
 
back alley said:
i would base it on money for one...and also the images that i made with the fuji x100...i have handled an m8 and an m9 but that hardly makes me an expert...if i can afford it i would love to keep my rd1 kit and buy the fuji kit as well.
Click to expand...

My thoughts as well. I loved the files I got from my X100. Never would have sold it if not for the fact that 95 percent of my work is done in the 50-90mm focal lengths.
So unless they've managed to go backwards with this new camera, it's an easy choice for me - someone who spent more than four years shooting with the M8 and M8.2.
 
jippiejee said:
So why compare them. Either you enjoy precise manual focusing with the M8 rangefinder, or you like the rangefinder 'style' photography of the AF Fuji Pro-X1. They're not playing the same sports. I might like both actually :)
Click to expand...

I agree with you... I like both and use both leica and fuji. I cannot see Leica doing anything but going up and up in price and after buying the M9 for $7000, I'm not willing to do it again. Fuji is now my back-up plan. The reason why they get compared is the similar ergonomics and dedicated shutter speed dials / aperture ring. People love the Konica Hexar and the Contax G. This is the closest we have to a rangefinder without going film or Leica.
 
fuji falls flat on their face when it comes to manual control. Sorry.. I have an X100 and really hate the lack of real MF control on the lens. It sounds like it's the same deal on the new Xpro lenses. Another thing most people don't realize is the Xpro uses a focal plane shutter. It will not be as quiet as the X100. To me, feels like the X100 is in it's own class.

I am really interested in the Xpro, and have considered going M8, i currently shoot RF on a bess a R3 and enjoy the manual control I get. Lots to consider. Interested to see the outcome in the next few months... ;)
 
bellyface said:
fuji falls flat on their face when it comes to manual control. Sorry.. I have an X100 and really hate the lack of real MF control on the lens.
Click to expand...

No need to be sorry.... I mean, it IS an AF camera with MF tacked on as an option. The problem is that too many people are looking to AF cameras to solve their MF fix.
 
For me it was a pretty easy choice.

Loved the pictures that I saw from the x100, figured the xpro would be as good or better.

Thought about the M8, the 8.2 is priced out of my range, but was concerned about reliability and hearing of the high cost and long wait times for Leica service.

The Fuji in Canada comes with a two year warranty and worse case scenario if I absolutely hated the camera, I could sell it privately and make most of my money back.
 
Has to be the X-Pro for me. I didn't much care for the M8 when I had a play with one. My X100 gives great results. Manual focus is pants I agree but if the AF in the X-Pro is good, then it's no problem for me at least. I used to own Contax G and never had an out of focus shot that wasn't my own doing.
 
if you are a die hard RF user who requires MF, then m8. Otherwise, the fuji will have better ISO, IQ and if its like the x100, it will likely be more reliable, though with any new electronic equipment expect some issues.
 
celluloidprop said:
, usable only with legacy glass which introduces crop factor weirdness).
Click to expand...

This shibbolith never ceases to annoy me. What "weirdness" is introduced by a 1.3 crop factor? Just do the simple math, once, and you should be good to to go, unless of course you have some sort of brain wasting disease that prevents you from remembering simple things like e.g your 21 is a 28, your 28 is a 35, and your 35 is a 50. Very difficult [rolls eyes]
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom