Leica X1 Review

Bashing the X1 only shows how frustrated we are not to have the spare candy money to buy one.
If I were rich I would buy one but I won't.
 
Only if I could remove the lens, put back the M-mount, locate a small zoom finder, gut the useless flash...

Why bother...buy a GF-2 [coming soon to match the EP-2 EVF].
 
[FONT=&quot]“Therefore the X1 is really a camera for serious photographers, professional or advanced amateur, who fully understand the compromises they'll be making in terms of operational speed (not to mention being limited to a fixed semi-wide angle lens), and can accept them in exchange for that excellent image quality and silent operation”.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]The Leica X1 is nothing more than a P&S ‘purse’ camera. A point and shoot for the little lady to carry around in her purse while the big dog struts around with the M9 dangling from his neck.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]The lens/sensor/shutter sub-assembly pays image quality dividends, the Leica fanboy façade pushes the right buttons, but the operational design of the camera seems to be a total cluster fck. An ill conceived mess, certainly not designed from the ground up to be a serious ‘photographers’ camera. It’s neither a responsive P&S with fast AF and minimal shutter lag nor is it a well thought out design that’s responsive to the immediate needs of street photographers.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]A 2000 dollar artifact exemplifying a total lack of purpose. [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]I bet it fits perfectly into a purse. 🙄[/FONT]
 
[FONT=&quot]I bet it fits perfectly into a purse. 🙄[/FONT][/QUOTE]

Well, a lot of people carry purses, including some pretty serious photographers, so I wouldn't be too down about that. 🙂

I was never in the market for this camera, so I can't say I'm particularly disappointed. I recently picked up a Minilux (another purse camera), and the difference in price should let me shoot, process and scan about 4000 photos. Have to say the pricing on the X1 does seem pretty outrageous even/especially when you take the classic posh 90s P&Ss as points of comparison.

That said, what I do like about the X1 is that it shows a willingness to expand on the whole concept of what a digital P&S can be - ironically by evoking the past. The endless sea of identically featured P&Ss out there isn't particularly inspiring, especially since all the recent "advances" seem to be focused on extraneous features (i.e., HD video, various modes, etc.), the exception being improvements in ISO. With the EP-1&2, the GF-1 and now the X1, it's nice to see the focus being shifted back to the basics: sharp, fast lens; better (i.e., "analog") handling (in some cases); form factor and sensor quality (as opposed to megapixel proliferation).

Some of the classic film P&Ss inspired really interesting work (think Yashica T5, Contax T2, Leica Minilux, Olympus Stylus, even the Hexar AF if you accept that as a P&S). Fingers crossed the current crop of digital devices will do the same.
 
jack palmer said:
Oh, it's a Point and Shoot alright. at twice the price. Just a bigger body, slow lens and Red dot. Now the Panasonic GF-1 is more a well thought out systems camera. If Leica would have offered something like this, they would have a real winner.


QUOTE=jsrockit;1214028]It's not a point and shoot.
Click to expand...
[/quote]

Every camera is a point and shoot then... it's focus is on classic design and its manual shutter speed and aperture dials. To me, that makes it not a P&S. If these functions are buried in a menu, then it is a point and shoot. I'm not interested in the GF-1 because I prefer a classic design that focuses on a no nonsense approach to photography. The X1 does this, the GF-1 is more menu based... and using M lenses with it is quirky and expensive for the average user (especially for wide angles lovers).

To be honest, I think leica made the right move. They are a company focused on longevity (M system / 50 years, etc). They know the X1 is not a camera with longevity. With sensors still being improved by leaps and bounds, it is silly for Leica to make a system built on this sensor. Instead they make a camera that has a lens perfectly matched to its sensor and move on once the techonology is outdated (yeah, I know...some of the specs are already outdated). Later, once sensor technology is more standardized format wise, then they can make a compact system camera. Sure, it is priced too high... nobody will dispute that. However, the X1 is still a nice camera in most ways... just not a streetshooters dream or good for action. There is still a lot it can do well though. It isn't just a P&S... unless the M9 is as well.
 
As compared to the M9's autofocus?

As compared to the M9's autofocus?

Did any one else notice this line,

Of course the X1's AF is much faster than an M9's, but it can't keep up with any decent modern compact [...]
Click to expand...

I probably should return my M9. I haven't gotten its AF to work once.
 
There is no argument that there are certain photographers that are going to find he X1 appealing, no matter the cost. I will say, that a lot of them wouldn't even give it the time of day if it didn't say Leica on it. This is more about perception than a quality product. Also ,although Leica has been making optics and cameras longer, Panasonic as a company does date to 1918. But...I say if you love it , want it, and can afford it, buy it. I just don't think there's much of an argument for it other than Leica produced it. I love my MP but the M9 and X1 cost to much (to me) for a technology that changes as fast as it does. These cameras will sell on ebay for a quarter of their cost ,if that in less than a few years. My bet is the whole concept of the X1 doesn't survive for more than a few years.




Every camera is a point and shoot then... it's focus is on classic design and its manual shutter speed and aperture dials. To me, that makes it not a P&S. If these functions are buried in a menu, then it is a point and shoot. I'm not interested in the GF-1 because I prefer a classic design that focuses on a no nonsense approach to photography. The X1 does this, the GF-1 is more menu based... and using M lenses with it is quirky and expensive for the average user (especially for wide angles lovers).

To be honest, I think leica made the right move. They are a company focused on longevity (M system / 50 years, etc). They know the X1 is not a camera with longevity. With sensors still being improved by leaps and bounds, it is silly for Leica to make a system built on this sensor. Instead they make a camera that has a lens perfectly matched to its sensor and move on once the techonology is outdated (yeah, I know...some of the specs are already outdated). Later, once sensor technology is more standardized format wise, then they can make a compact system camera. Sure, it is priced too high... nobody will dispute that. However, the X1 is still a nice camera in most ways... just not a streetshooters dream or good for action. There is still a lot it can do well though. It isn't just a P&S... unless the M9 is as well.[/QUOTE]
 
for the record i am also a little tired of the "red dot dunderheads" analogy. to pontificate that the only folks buying a camera 99% of us have never tried will be short on sense (and cents) seems rather silly to me.

i don't shoot a lot of "street" but i work in a very street inspired fashion. almost all my work is scale focused and fast. if the x1 has a decent scale focus interface then indeed IT WOULD MAKE A GREAT STREETSHOOTER.

it's a shame some of the best digital streetshooters i have tried seem to suffer an ill informed reputation as being incapable. dp1 anybody?
 
jack palmer said:
There is no argument that there are certain photographers that are going to find he X1 appealing...I will say, that a lot of them wouldn't even give it the time of day if it didn't say Leica on it. This is more about perception than a quality product.
Click to expand...

So what? This doesn't tell us anything. PLenty of people buy Canon or Nikon on brand allegiance.

The X1 does have drawbacks; but it's a unique camera. I personally would prefer a digital Hexar made by Sony with a Konica lens for $1000, but this camera is unique in its combination of good lens and large sensor. Leica should get some credit for a brave, original design. Sure, if Canon or Sony produced something similar for $800 that might be better. But they don't.

I won't buy it. You won't. But why assume you're superior to people who do?
 
hmm think I will stick with the grd for digital though the X1 does look really nice, just a bit to much money for what it is imo.
 
Paul T. said:
So what? This doesn't tell us anything. PLenty of people buy Canon or Nikon on brand allegiance.

The X1 does have drawbacks; but it's a unique camera. I personally would prefer a digital Hexar made by Sony with a Konica lens for $1000, but this camera is unique in its combination of good lens and large sensor. Leica should get some credit for a brave, original design. Sure, if Canon or Sony produced something similar for $800 that might be better. But they don't.

I won't buy it. You won't. But why assume you're superior to people who do?
Click to expand...

Paul, I don't assume I'm superior to those that may buy the X1, just that I'm exersizing better judgement. I know people buy all kinds of things on brand alliance alone but that's not a good reason to buy anything. And , what makes it unique? the shape? the slow lens? the lack of view finder? the simple controls and menu? the painted finish? the slow focus? I know, it has to be ,paying more for less. 😀
 
"Best high-ISO performance of any compact camera, bar none"

"Image quality from the Leica X1 is exemplary. The quality of the sensor and the in-camera processing is as good as I've seen from just about any camera. In terms of overall IQ it puts every other small camera that I've ever worked with to shame, and challenges many DSLRs."

"The web simply isn't a good place to do the nit-picking evaluations that so many folks love. Only large prints appropriately viewed tell the tale properly. In this regard all I'll add is that by all measures the X1 produces prints up to and including 13X19" in size that at least in terms of noise are essentially indistinguishable from those shot with my Leica M9 and a 35mm F/1.4 Summilux, a system worth over $10,000. In terms of noise that's the case up to ISO 1600, where the M9 has a small but noticable noise advantage, as seen below in shots taken at each camera's highest ISO setting."

some "bits" from other reviews. there seems to be a theme running that the sensor is the same one found in the d300?
 
jack palmer said:
There is no argument that there are certain photographers that are going to find he X1 appealing, no matter the cost. I will say, that a lot of them wouldn't even give it the time of day if it didn't say Leica on it. This is more about perception than a quality product. Also ,although Leica has been making optics and cameras longer, Panasonic as a company does date to 1918. But...I say if you love it , want it, and can afford it, buy it. I just don't think there's much of an argument for it other than Leica produced it. I love my MP but the M9 and X1 cost to much (to me) for a technology that changes as fast as it does. These cameras will sell on ebay for a quarter of their cost ,if that in less than a few years. My bet is the whole concept of the X1 doesn't survive for more than a few years.
Click to expand...

I for one wish it didn't have Leica's name on it... because it would be less than $1000 if it didn't. I really like the classic design of the X1, but in the end I had to go with a M8 instead.
 
emraphoto said:
"Best high-ISO performance of any compact camera, bar none"

"Image quality from the Leica X1 is exemplary. The quality of the sensor and the in-camera processing is as good as I've seen from just about any camera. In terms of overall IQ it puts every other small camera that I've ever worked with to shame, and challenges many DSLRs."

"The web simply isn't a good place to do the nit-picking evaluations that so many folks love. Only large prints appropriately viewed tell the tale properly. In this regard all I'll add is that by all measures the X1 produces prints up to and including 13X19" in size that at least in terms of noise are essentially indistinguishable from those shot with my Leica M9 and a 35mm F/1.4 Summilux, a system worth over $10,000. In terms of noise that's the case up to ISO 1600, where the M9 has a small but noticable noise advantage, as seen below in shots taken at each camera's highest ISO setting."
Click to expand...

Wow, what camera are they all talking about? It can't be that horrible X1 can it? 😛
 
have heard it (the horrible x1) has a distance scale in feet or meters ala the dp1/g10. would add up to a pretty decent shooter if you ask me. but, like most, i have yet to lay my hands on one.
 
emraphoto said:
have heard it (the horrible x1) has a distance scale in feet or meters ala the dp1/g10. would add up to a pretty decent shooter if you ask me. but, like most, i have yet to lay my hands on one.
Click to expand...

The only issue with this is that it goes from like 6 feet right to infinity. No settings on the scale after 6 feet or something like that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom