Leica X1 Review

jsrockit said:
I agree... I went with the M8 and a CV 35mm...
Click to expand...

Was on a X1 waiting list with a dealer. Then this unused BP MP from a collector came along for USD 2700 and I decided to go full frame.
In 2 years, the X1 would have been a USD 2000 write off, the MP will be a USD 2700+ value 😀. And my M8 gets serious competition.
 
In a fit of nostalgia, remembering the good ol' Leica days of yore, I was considering taking a financial hit and trading away my D700 and lenses for the X1 and a life as a "fine art" photographer.

After further review, I ask myself what was I thinking? Leica did not think enough of the X1 or the potential X1 user to provide a viewfinder? Do they think we should put on our reading glasses and hold the camera at arm's length, peering at the rear screen and it's daytime reflections?

After even more review, I remembered that my D700 is probably the best camera I've ever owned and the image quality is more than I could want. True, it;s a little heavy with its zoom lenses, but quite a picture machine none-the-less.

So thanks, X1, for eliciting brief rememberances of good times with Leica in the past.
 
If Leica had the financial legs to make a real breakthrough camera, we would not need to make excuses for the price tag. They contracted for camera modules and brought us the best camera that they could make at that price point. Canon, Nikon, or Sony will produce a small large sensor mirrorless camera that solves many of the obvious shortcomings of the X1, but you will not get the simplicity of function. Unfortunately for Leica, missing the mark will mean few sales. I hope that they fix the shortcomings rather than dropping the concept, because it is unlikely that other manufacturers will give us shutter and aperture controls of such simplicity.
 
rover said:
At least the high ISO performance is good.

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/LeicaX1/
Click to expand...

I'll be interested to see one in the flesh at some point, but I'm disappointed by what I'm reading here. I was hoping this could be the camera I always have with me just in case something good presents itself. This role is currently sort of filled by a G1, which fits in my not-so-big glove compartment. (But, I wish for something that would fit in a coat pocket.)

I knew there was no viewfinder, of course, but I was hoping the AF performance would be excellent, because then, maybe, I could have used an optical viewfinder for street shooting. Sounds like the image quality is outstanding, which I did expect, but this camera, for me, appears to suffer from the same drawbacks as the E-P1: no integrated viewfinder, aggravated by poor AF performance. And apparently the AF performance is especially annoying in low light.

I hope there will be future Leica models in this line that improve things. Meanwhile I look forward to more m-4/3 goodies, such as more Leica-designed lenses.
 
Bike Tourist said:
Leica did not think enough of the X1 or the potential X1 user to provide a viewfinder? Do they think we should put on our reading glasses and hold the camera at arm's length, peering at the rear screen and it's daytime reflections?
Click to expand...

Who says you have to hold it at arms length? I don't understand this argument. With my LCD only cameras I still hold them like a regular camera, but at about 5-8" away from my face instead of up to my eye.
 
jsrockit said:
Who says you have to hold it at arms length? I don't understand this argument. With my LCD only cameras I still hold them like a regular camera, but at about 5-8" away from my face instead of up to my eye.
Click to expand...

Many of us do not like eye strain, nor are we nearsighted. We give you four stars for holding the camera at a distance that only my kids would force upon me. I make my living doing eye exams where it becomes clear that 5" - 8" is not an ideal working distance.
 
jsrockit said:
Who says you have to hold it at arms length? I don't understand this argument. With my LCD only cameras I still hold them like a regular camera, but at about 5-8" away from my face instead of up to my eye.
Click to expand...
Enjoy your LCD panels, please, and don't mind me.

I'm an atavistic old guy who thinks it silly in the extreme to mess with a rear panel instead of a genuine viewfinder. But I belong to a dying (literally) breed who would rather cling to the old ways than adopt the clearly superior modern techniques of image capture. I'm so old-fashioned that I still shoot verticals!
 
Had a play with one today, chose the grd iii instead, I thought it was loads better/faster/more versatile/cheaper/prettier/quieter/smaller oh and a much much much better Lcd you know the thing that replaced the viewfinder.
 
Bike Tourist said:
Enjoy your LCD panels, please, and don't mind me.

I'm an atavistic old guy who thinks it silly in the extreme to mess with a rear panel instead of a genuine viewfinder. But I belong to a dying (literally) breed who would rather cling to the old ways than adopt the clearly superior modern techniques of image capture. I'm so old-fashioned that I still shoot verticals!
Click to expand...

I concur with Bike Tourist.

Unlike younger folks, especially the myopic ones, arms-length photography is thrust upon us aging yuppies who might have more money to buy toys.

As posted before in these forums:

If you are already myopic but without astigmatism, removing your glasses and seek focus works, sometimes.

If you can use a viewfinder without correction [near-prefect infinity vision], but now need glasses to read a newspaper at a 0.5m distance, then the dioptric correction ["reciprocal of focal distance in metres"] will be 1/0.5m or +2.

If you now need to focus on an LCD at 6~8" (0.15~0.2m), then the dioptric correction now needed is +6.5 ~ +5, approaching coke bottle bottom territory.

If you already needing +power glasses for everyday...we will all get there someday...then a +8 might even be needed.

BTW, no drug store will carry any cheapie's beyond +3.5...so what do you do, get a prescription pair just to use this new-fangled digital camera?

Have you any idea how much a decent pair of progressive spectacle lenses (0~+8) costs?
 
Last edited:
bwcolor said:
Many of us do not like eye strain, nor are we nearsighted. We give you four stars for holding the camera at a distance that only my kids would force upon me. I make my living doing eye exams where it becomes clear that 5" - 8" is not an ideal working distance.
Click to expand...

Well, I should've said I wear glasses. :angel:
 
ferider said:
The real competitor to the X1 is the M8. What would you prefer: New X1 or used M8 + CV 28/3.5 ?
Click to expand...

For me, the competition is really the M9. If I am set on buying an M9 and it costs $7000 (or even $5200, once a few years have gone by and the price on used ones stabilizes), why would I drop the first $1K on this point and shoot? I am going to get an M9, but it is going to take me about three years to save for it. Every dollar that I spend on a different camera in the interim is just a side track.

Ben Marks
 
I don't think the X1 is a bad camera at all, just stick a viewfinder on it if you want a viewfinder. I've enjoyed the Panasonics too, but the Leica user interface and ergonomics are so much nicer than any of the Japanese cameras. Look at the image quality compared to the Pany or Oly m4/3s -- the Leica blows them away.

I understand why the AF is slower than a DSLR. It needs a larger buffer and it needs some tweaks to make manual/scale focusing easier -- it's a shame they didn't do this but hopefully the X2 will rock.
 
Last edited:
Benjamin Marks said:
For me, the competition is really the M9. If I am set on buying an M9 and it costs $7000 (or even $5200, once a few years have gone by and the price on used ones stabilizes), why would I drop the first $1K on this point and shoot? I am going to get an M9, but it is going to take me about three years to save for it. Every dollar that I spend on a different camera in the interim is just a side track.

Ben Marks
Click to expand...

Ok, this camera isn't a point and shoot anymore than the M9 is a point and shoot (except if AF now defines P&S). Also, it really depends on what you are using right now (and the next three years) as to if money spent on a different camera in the meantime is a side track. I sure as hell would rather be out making photos with a capable camera than sitting around for three years not making photos.
 
Stewart Weir's Review

Stewart Weir's Review

If this has already been posted, sorry for the repeat. But look at what a first rate pro says about the camera and look at the work he's done.
http://www.photoradar.com/reviews/product/leica-x1-review

It's worth looking at all his photos on his website.

Of course this only proves that a first rate photographer can produce superb photos with many different cameras, but it shows the potential of the X1.

Mark
 
jsrockit said:
Ok, this camera isn't a point and shoot anymore than the M9 is a point and shoot (except if AF now defines P&S). Also, it really depends on what you are using right now (and the next three years) as to if money spent on a different camera in the meantime is a side track. I sure as hell would rather be out making photos with a capable camera than sitting around for three years not making photos.
Click to expand...
True. If indeed the choice were to make images with the X1 or to make none at all. Happily that is not the case for me. From my perspective, and for my needs, the question is, "why buy another piece of gear?" The only reason is if the new kit does something that the old kit don't. The M9 would allow for lenses to be used at their own proper focal length--something that would be quite a benefit. But what a cost. I am not willing to sell enough of my perfectly good equipment for the purchase of one camera. So it must be a wait. And so, from that perspective, the x1 is at right angles to what I want.

Ben
 
jsrockit said:
I think some people actually like using an LCD to compose.
Click to expand...

I do, at times. It's extraordinary how well I can focus with the GF1's screen--generally better than with my rangefinders. My vision is still pretty OK, with glasses anyway, so I don't have to hold it at arm's length. For indoor/low-light photography, I think the GF1's LCD is actually hugely superior to, say, the M7. Out in the sun, though, forget it--and ultimately, I do prefer some kind of eye-level finder.

Pretty soon EVFs will improve drastically, and they could be a magic bullet for cameras like the X1.
 
jsrockit said:
I think some people actually like using an LCD to compose.
Click to expand...

I've gotten use to it and when I can see it it works fine. Would I prefer a Nikon F quality finder, yes, but it's a tool, to enjoy using it, I can adjust.

After all RF without a mirror system 5uck at 300mm lenses and the same for macro work. Stick an 21/f4.5 lens on an SLR in existing darkness and they don't do too well either, where are rangefinders rock.

B2 (;->
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom