Leica X2 versus Om-D for me

[robert blu]

Leica X... or Olympus OM-D ? This is a problem. The only way is to have them both 😀
I'm a satisfied owner of the x1 since more than 1 year and with the money necessary to upgrade to x2 I plan to buy an OM-D, not sure yet which lens...maybe just an adapter and I'll use one of my M lenses...
robert

 

[Paddy C]

Another question: why aren't you considering the X100?

 

[texchappy]

Another question: why aren't you considering the X100?

Heard some really good things about it so I’m not sure to be perfectly honest. I know that some of the things I’ve read about the Pro X1 put me off.

 

[Godfrey]

I've narrowed down the digital choice for me to the Leica X2 and the OM-D E-M5. I had decided on the X2 and then watched this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gPbvV78bf0A&feature=player_embedded#! and it got me thinking about the Om-D.

So here's my appraisal of the pro's of each for me and my wife:

X2----
1. Leica Quality
2. Leica Image Quality
3. Size
4. Made in Germany
5. Leica customer service
6. Fits my shooting style (if I have one)
7. Love the control layout
8. APS-C sensor


OM-D---
1. Images online appear comparable to the X2
2. Great lenses and the versatility they bring
3. wouldn't have to keep the D40 to shoot longer (birds, wildlife)
4. waterproof
5. outstanding image stabilization
6. better autofocus (and possibly better manual with some lenses)
7. better fits wife taking pictures

So, input por favor.

Seems to come down ultimately to Leica quality versus Oly versatility.


BTW: I have decided that I can shoot film with my Zorki and F2 for quite a while to see if I like film for those who have followed my not so internal debate on that issue.

Totally different cameras to be used in totally different ways.

Do you want a system camera or a fixed lens camera?
Something very small and pocketable, or something that is akin to a small SLR in size (with an SLR's system options to make decisions about)?

The Olympus is a very nice camera and the initial purchase is less expensive, but as soon as you add a couple of additional lenses to gain the benefit of its features and versatility, you've spent more than the X2 costs. At least I would ... that's the point of a system camera, you build a system with it.

The X2 is a "buy the camera and a viewfinder, maybe a case ... you're done: go make pictures" proposition. It is an intentionally limited, simple camera by comparison to any system camera. It's much smaller and lighter, and has very easy to learn and use controls.

They are different cameras intended for different kinds of use.
Decide what you want, no one can do that for you.

(Me: I have several system cameras and the systems to back them up. The X2 appeals to me for its simplicity, excellent image quality, excellent controls, and the constraints it imposes. Creativity expands in an environment of constraints.)

 

[jsrockit]

I do have to say though that the image quality of the E-M5 is really damn good. Totally different than m4/3 from a few generations ago... and the 20mm panasonic is awesome on that camera. I may not have liked the aspect ratio and ergonomics, but there is no denying that it is capable of killer IQ. Olympus has a winner on its hand even if I didn't care for it in use. AND even though I prefer the X2 for my needs, I cannot say that Leica has a winner on its hands (in the same fashion as Olympus)... it'll be just another luxury niche compact for them.

 

[Jubb Jubb]

Do you really want to be taking photos like you would with an iPhone - arms outstretched, squinting at the lcd screen, dissociated from life around you?

Hah, it's interesting you say that. I saw Ben Lowy talk last night who dropped all professional camera equipment for an iPhone to shoot photojournalism and street. Part of the reason he did that is because a camera and viewfinder would often disassociate himself from a situation or person, whereas shooting with a phone he could make eye contact and get in closer to the action.

I have also found this to be true when shooting on the street with my phone instead of a rangefinder.

But you are definitely right, often enough it is hard to compose with a screen.

 

[jsrockit]

Hah, it's interesting you say that. I saw Ben Lowy talk last night who dropped all professional camera equipment for an iPhone to shoot photojournalism and street. Part of the reason he did that is because a camera and viewfinder would often disassociate himself from a situation or person, whereas shooting with a phone he could make eye contact and get in closer to the action.

I have also found this to be true when shooting on the street with my phone instead of a rangefinder.

But you are definitely right, often enough it is hard to compose with a screen.

I've revisited my thinking with this too... the Ricoh GR has shown me that I actually like to use an LCD with wide angles on the street (partly for the reasons stated above regarding the iPhone). However, with normal lenses, I don't like it. I prefer an VF of some sort. I don't use the iPhone for photography.

 

[Godfrey]

I've narrowed down the digital choice for me to the Leica X2 and the OM-D E-M5. I had decided on the X2 and then watched this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gPbvV78bf0A&feature=player_embedded#! and it got me thinking about the Om-D.

So here's my appraisal of the pro's of each for me and my wife:

X2----
1. Leica Quality
2. Leica Image Quality
3. Size
4. Made in Germany
5. Leica customer service
6. Fits my shooting style (if I have one)
7. Love the control layout
8. APS-C sensor


OM-D---
1. Images online appear comparable to the X2
2. Great lenses and the versatility they bring
3. wouldn't have to keep the D40 to shoot longer (birds, wildlife)
4. waterproof
5. outstanding image stabilization
6. better autofocus (and possibly better manual with some lenses)
7. better fits wife taking pictures

So, input por favor.

Seems to come down ultimately to Leica quality versus Oly versatility.


BTW: I have decided that I can shoot film with my Zorki and F2 for quite a while to see if I like film for those who have followed my not so internal debate on that issue.

I own both Olympus E-M1 and Leica X2. Both are fine performers. The X2 is obviously a camera with more limited versatility given a fixed lens; the E-M1 outfitted with a single 17mm f/1.8 lens isn't that much larger or heavier, or difficult to use. And the differences in image quality between them is virtually non-existent. Same goes for the E-M5 or E-M10 only a little moreso as both of those are a bit smaller than the E-M1.

What it comes down to for me is responsiveness. The X2 is slow in operation by comparison to the Olympus cameras. Slow to start, slow to focus, a bit more shutter lag, a lot more time between shots.

Since I bought the E-M1, the X2 sits in the cupboard.

G

 

[asiafish]

I had an X2, sold it, bought an RX100m2, and my replacement (used) X2 arrives tomorrow. The RX100m2 does everything the X2 did and quite a bit more, but it just lacked the feel in the hand and the UI was far more computer and less camera.

I'm keeping the RX100 as my wife rather liked it on our last vacation and of course it is much better for wider or longer than 35mm shots. The RX100 series are really the only cameras that, in my opinion, rival the X2 for image quality while retaining the X2's pocketable dimensions.

 

[stillshunter]

Darn, I knew I shouldn't have read this thread. Guess what I want now?
Hint: it doesn't have an "M" in the name which is weird considering the brand. Hmmm...

 

[Archiver]

I had the X1 for a day and a night and wasn't happy at all for many reasons. The X2 is most likely better, but the initial experience left me with a bad taste in my mouth. The X1 was noisy in focusing, slow in auto exposure, the aperture blades made a godawful TICK TICK TICK under changing light conditions, and even the files didn't seem as high quality as I had hoped.

The EM-5 is a wonderful camera in so many respects and I far prefer it to the X1 and a fair few other cameras. For a while, I was shooting the EM-5 in preference to the M9. The EM-5 was my equal-second camera when I went to Hong Kong in 2013, alongside the M9.

 

[Godfrey]

Leica X... or Olympus OM-D ? This is a problem. The only way is to have them both 😀
I'm a satisfied owner of the x1 since more than 1 year and with the money necessary to upgrade to x2 I plan to buy an OM-D, not sure yet which lens...maybe just an adapter and I'll use one of my M lenses...
robert

I own them both: Olympus E-M1 and Leica X2.

The E-M1 and E-M5 are a bit different in size and control layout, but very similar in overall capabilities and use. Both of these are system cameras with extensive accessories and lenses available. The X2 is a fixed lens compact with only a couple of accessories available.

Both the Olympus and the Leica are excellent cameras. They are very different in use.

• The difference in sensor size is a wash—the E-M5 and E-M1 sensors are very much the same sensitivity as the X2 sensor, and similarly clean at extraordinary ISO settings.
• The Olympus cameras are faster and more responsive on autofocus and shot-to-shot recovery speed.
• The Leica is much easier to set up and use in zone-focusing/street shooting type situations.
• The Leica has much simpler controls and no customizations; the Olympus have extensive control customizations and significantly more in-camera features.
• Both have excellent service and support from the manufacturer.
• The Leica is a delight to use for most average shooting circumstances with an optical clip-on viewfinder and its simple controls. The EVF is not necessary for eye level work unless you are working the lens wide open and at close distances.
• The Olympus is a delight to use and operates more like a very responsive, professional SLR.

It's worth having both. I use the E-M1 much more than I use the X2 as it is more versatile, but the X2 is much more convenient to have with me all the time for those occasional shooting moments due to its smaller size, lighter weight, and simpler operation. In a way, I consider the X2 as the "portable visual notebook" camera where the E-M1 is the "compact professional camera."

Buy whichever one works best for your uses. Or whichever one you like more... it doesn't matter. Once you have whichever, adapt to its particular capabilities and constraints and make great photographs. A day and a night with either is nowhere near sufficient to become familiar and comfortable with their capabilities. Either is a camera that you can use for years of excellent photography.

G

 

[robert blu]

Just for the chronicle, two years later than my comment Godfrey reported above I still have and use the x1 and never upgraded to a different x or another camera!
robert
PS: too many options in the market...and the x1 is still a good everyday camera...