I'm thisclose to replacing all my M gear with an X-Pro2

[mgrinnan]

Look, we’re all getting older... just look at the interface we’re using right now. That said, I’ve never used Fuji, unless you count fujifilm which is what I use for color. The Leica M thing is its own beast and probably not best for shooting past 50mm. I will never own gear as expensive as you (probably), and even if I could, I’d buy totally different stuff. I hate SLRs with the sole exception of the K1000, which is Jesus’ gift to mankind. I wish you luck in using Fuji digital products, and hope you lose as little money as possible in selling your Leica gear. godspeed

 

[quadtones]

Thank you for starting this thread. I am a long time M-user (first M2 sometime in the 70s) at the beginning of a long queue to get my M-Monochrom sensor replaced and have been contemplating a similar switch. I'll probably keep the M6 and v4 35mm Summicron, and maybe the 75. After reading everyone's comments, I suspect I'm going to order the XPro-2 with the 23mm, and perhaps the 50 and decide whether to sell the MM when(ever) it finally returns from the mothership. I expect it will go.

 

[Sid836]

You will regret it again by the moment the first stuck/dead pixels show up on your sensor.
Great camera, but with flaws and a filthy service (at least where I live).
Keep your M and save money for a digital. After a few years, your M stuff will be worth of something, but your X-Pro 2 a mere nothing (same story as X-Pro 1).

 

[Dogman]

...After a few years, your M stuff will be worth of something, but your X-Pro 2 a mere nothing (same story as X-Pro 1).

I suspect the value of the camera after several years depends more on the use one gets from it, the results obtained from it and the enjoyment one gets from using it. Buying camera equipment as an investment is not a wise proposition.

I'm using two "old" X-Pro1 cameras right now that are worth infinitely more to me than my previous M6 Leicas simply because my photos are sharper.

 

[willie_901]

shawn's advice above is very useful.

Unfortunately adapted lenses have no way to communicate focus distance to the body.

And – the X-Pro 2 EVF's magnification and eye relief is a bit inferior to the X-T1/2. The X-T2 would be best for serious repurposing of non-native lenses.

For digital photography with M lenses a M body or RD- 1 are the only ways to use an OVF with parallax estimates. (Does Leica S-system support parallax estimates with M lenses?)

I just ordered a X-Pro 2 from Stephen despite the face that I will probably use the EVF with my 56/1.2 Fujinon. I was able to use an ancient Nikon 85/2 LTM lens with the Zeiss Ikon ZM frame lines, so perhaps the X-Pro 2 OVF will be practical as well.

Also is the EVF is the only option for my Fujinon 14/2.8. I used to the X-T1 EVF and this focal length so it will be OK.

 

[shawn]

Yup, no parallax correction with adapted lenses. When framing is critical you can either switch to the EVF or set the ERF window to the full screen view. That lets you fine tune framing while still having the benefit of the OVF. With the ERF in full screen view you still have the benefits of focus peaking and the monochrome trick I posted above works with it. I've shot my Nikon 105mm at a soccor game that way and it worked fine. In that case though I had the benefits of subjects no closer than maybe 10' and also stopped down for decent DOF.

Shawn

 

[jsrockit]

I hate SLRs with the sole exception of the K1000, which is Jesus’ gift to mankind.

Awesome... 😀

 

[jsrockit]

You will regret it again by the moment the first stuck/dead pixels show up on your sensor.

Never had a dead pixel on any of my Fuji gear and I've used a lot of them.

Keep your M and save money for a digital. After a few years, your M stuff will be worth of something, but your X-Pro 2 a mere nothing (same story as X-Pro 1).

M digital stuff goes down in prices as well. The X-Pro1 still sells for 25% of its original price. On $1600, you lost $1200. For a Leica, percentage wise a M9 might sell for more, but on a $7000 camera, you can get $2500... or you lost $4500. None of these cameras should be bought with any thought as to what it will be worth in the future. They are computers. That said, you don't have to feed them film...so the money lost is comparable the longer you use it.

 

[Ken Ford]

My used 14/2.8 arrived yesterday completing my basic three lens kit needed to functionally replace my M-P - first impression is very favorable, it's not silent like my WR primes but it handles nicely. I also checked out a 90/2 WR at the pusher's, one may be in my future someday instead of using my 90 Elmar-C on the Fuji adapter.

 

[willie_901]

Never had a dead pixel on any of my Fuji gear and I've used a lot of them.


M digital stuff goes down in prices as well. The X-Pro1 still sells for 25% of its original price. On $1600, you lost $1200. For a Leica, percentage wise a M9 might sell for more, but on a $7000 camera, you can get $2500... or you lost $4500. None of these cameras should be bought with any thought as to what it will be worth in the future. They are computers. That said, you don't have to feed them film...so the money lost is comparable the longer you use it.

Since 2007 I had exactly one dead pixel issue. I averaged three interior photography gigs a week which generated a huge number of raw files between 2008 and 2015. It was a single red pixel on a D700.

I used the X100, X100T and X-T1 (two bodies) without any dead pixel (or other issues related to electronics or build quality). The X-Pro 2 has an in-camera "pixel mapping" function. I guess the X-T2 does as well. I have no idea how well it works.

 

[newsgrunt]

I'd keep the Rapidwinder and sell the Leicavit

 

[Ken Ford]

I'd keep the Rapidwinder and sell the Leicavit

Why? I actually prefer the 'Vit.

 

[newsgrunt]

get more money for the 'Vit and the RW is so elegant 😉 and because it was made by Tom 😉

 

[Ken Ford]

Ah, but my 'Vit is user condition plus I have a fitted halfcase for it and the M6.

 

[adamjbonn]

Well, I guess it's better than having first bought the Fuji, then deciding you wanted the Leica instead. At least with the Leica gear, you'll get a good portion of your money back. With the Fuji gear, you need to know it's what you want because there'll be no getting your money back if you decide 6 months down the road that wasn't a good move.

I don't think that's entirely accurate.

In the UK at least used M240s are going for under £3000 on ebay, yet still cost around £5000 new

Conversely, X-Pro2s cost £1350 new and go for around £850 on ebay. So on the one hand the percentage isn't so different, but there's a hell of a difference between taking £2000 bath and £500 one

Now a lot of people when presented with this say,

'Ah but I meant buy a secondhand m9 it'll always be worth what you paid for it'

Very true, the M9/8 are pretty much at the bottom of their depreciation curve, so that's true. But equally one could buy a secondhand X-Pro1 for about £250ish and say the same thing

In the 2016 'black friday' vendors were ditching the X-Pro1 and two lenses and a case for £500 brand new. Had one bought that and flipped it all 18months later one would have made money.

Incidentally in the same Black Friday other vendors were punting out the Leica M-E and 35 & 50 summarits for £5000. You'd have made money on that deal too.

I suspect the m240 hasn't done owners many favours in terms of resale, it was (and continues to be) available for a very long time, leading to high market saturation, thoughout its life many have compared it unfavourable (rightly or wrongly) to the M9, and now the M10 has landed, the poor M240 has been met with a wave of ambivalence

Definitely a buyers, not a sellers market for one.

Leica glass is of course a different story, but the bodies are deprecating digital products, just like all the other cameras

 

[adamjbonn]

My used 14/2.8 arrived yesterday completing my basic three lens kit needed to functionally replace my M-P - first impression is very favorable, it's not silent like my WR primes but it handles nicely. I also checked out a 90/2 WR at the pusher's, one may be in my future someday instead of using my 90 Elmar-C on the Fuji adapter.

The 90 is quite big Ken, and as I'm sure you realise, will be more like a 120 fov on FF

The 60 will be about 90 and its a nice lens, but maybe give the 56 a try as that's a lovely bit of glass

 

[adamjbonn]

Never had a dead pixel on any of my Fuji gear and I've used a lot of them.



M digital stuff goes down in prices as well. The X-Pro1 still sells for 25% of its original price. On $1600, you lost $1200. For a Leica, percentage wise a M9 might sell for more, but on a $7000 camera, you can get $2500... or you lost $4500. None of these cameras should be bought with any thought as to what it will be worth in the future. They are computers. That said, you don't have to feed them film...so the money lost is comparable the longer you use it.

Sorry I missed this, I just basically said the same thing.

 

[Ken Ford]

The 90 is quite big Ken, and as I'm sure you realise, will be more like a 120 fov on FF

The 60 will be about 90 and its a nice lens, but maybe give the 56 a try as that's a lovely bit of glass

Hi, Adam - I thought the size of the 90 was workable, I tried it on an XP2 at the store. I'm unlikely to buy one new unless they run another deep discount sale, but it's on my future list.

I was never overly impressed with the handling or FOV of either the 56 or the 60 which held me back from the X system until recently. The 50/2 is what did it for me following the release of the 23/2 - with FF rangefinders I work best with a 21 - 35 - 75. After the 50 was released, the system was finally viable for me.

Now, if they would just do a smaller 14/4 WR...

 

[adamjbonn]

Hi, Adam - I thought the size of the 90 was workable, I tried it on an XP2 at the store. I'm unlikely to buy one new unless they run another deep discount sale, but it's on my future list.

I was never overly impressed with the handling or FOV of either the 56 or the 60 which held me back from the X system until recently. The 50/2 is what did it for me following the release of the 23/2 - with FF rangefinders I work best with a 21 - 35 - 75. After the 50 was released, the system was finally viable for me.

Now, if they would just do a smaller 14/4 WR...

Hi Ken,

I've got the 50 on loan from Fuji at the moment, and I'm quite excited to try 50 as I think it's going to be a bit of a sweet spot for APSC

There's rumours of MK2 18mm F2....

Personally (ymmv) I struggle a bit with the shorter APSC lenses, sure 18 may have a FOV like 28, but 18 doesn't really draw a scene like a 28 does!

The 14 and the 90 are the only Fuji primes that I've yet to try, the 16 is a great bit of glass... comparatively colossal though. Certainly not aimed at OVF users 🙂

 

[Ken Ford]

Adam, I've been putting time in every day with the 14-23-50 kit and have to say I'm delighted so far. I haven't been able to do any processing yet due to lack of time, but when I peep I'm quite pleased. I'm looking forward to what you think about the 50, I'm a long time 75mm shooter on film and digital and prefer it over the more usual 85/90.

I can say I'd have zero interest in an 18 - 28mm is probably my least liked FOV. But an updated 14/4 WR - oh, my that could be nice!