Love the M9ti but not keen on X100?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Austerby

Austerby

Well-known
Local time
3:00 PM
Joined
Feb 7, 2007
Messages
1,069
Am I the only here who thinks this?

I was really impressed with the M9 titanium - brings M cameras up-to-date, interesting innovation yet retaining the core functionality of the classic Leica. A brilliant piece of design IMHO.

The X100 I don't get - it's not retro styled as much as a reproduction piece. I can't see what it adds on top of the current range of m4/3rds cameras apart from the rather complicated viewfinder. It also seems expensive for a novelty fixed lens camera.

This does seem a contrarian view to the members of this forum - does anyone care/dare to agree with me?
 
Don't agree I'm afraid. The M9ti is not so much a camera as a collector's piece, nothing wrong with that at all, but I'm not a collector.

The X100 has proper controls, a built in optical viewfinder, and looks lovely, none of the current m43 cameras tick any of those boxes. If it's $1000, then yes, it's a little steep compared to a DSLR, but you'll always pay more for a niche product.

I'd also say the M9ti is a little steep for a novelty camera...
 
Completely disagree. Any purchaser of the titanium M9 most likely will never make pictures with it. I'm very excited to see the great work photographers will make with the Fuji x100.

Also, with the APS-C sensor being larger than the m4/3 sensor (and most other high end compacts not including the Sigma) it will yield a very different picture.

The only thing that has me scratching my head is the flash they wedged in there.
 
I won't be buying either of them ... but good to see a thread combining the two most talked about items there's been here at RFF for a while ... saves space! :D
 
Love the M9ti but not keen on X100?

This is a joke, right? There may be someone who shares this position, somewhere.... :bang:

Austerby said:
"Love the M9ti but not keen on X100?"
Am I the only here who thinks this?

This does seem a contrarian view to the members of this forum - does anyone care/dare to agree with me?
Click to expand...
 
Methinks me smells a whiff of sarcasm here. Comparing two cameras, one 25x the price of the other can't be serious.
 
Seriously?


Wait...is this the Sultan of Brunei?
Yo...Sultan Baby...you never return my calls! I got this smokin' business deal you want to hear. All the money you got to burn....
 
Buy both. Then send me the X100 when you've confirmed your presumptions of it being a piece of shait.
 
I totally agree, volkswagon helped leica design a camera for the price of a car. I'm hoping leica can help design a car for the price of a camera.

I'm all in.
 
Interesting responses - and no, it's not a troll.

I'm not for one moment comparing value for money, or the collectors market or any of those diversions. I'm unlikely to buy either but I don't think the X100 is rubbish but nor do I the M9ti.

I just happen to find the M9ti more interesting than others seem to and the X100 doesn't quite impress me in the same way it does others.

Are contrary opinions not welcome here?
 
I think the M9ti is interesting in that it shows what Leica is considering for future production cameras. The LED framelines and the crystal LCD cover.I think in 18-24 months when the M9 is replaced those are the features we'll be seeing.

The X100 is a novelty for sure. Fuji saw all the hoopla about the Olympus EP-1 And Leica's X1 and figured out exactly what those crowds are looking for. A rangefinderish camera witch classic styling and a fast lens in a compact package. And that is exactly what the X100 is and I'm sure it will be a great seller. I'm sure we'll be seeing EP-1's and EP-2's and Panasonic GH's for sale en mass in the used departments soon.
 
Austerby said:
The X100 I don't get - it's not retro styled as much as a reproduction piece. I can't see what it adds on top of the current range of m4/3rds cameras apart from the rather complicated viewfinder. It also seems expensive for a novelty fixed lens camera.
Click to expand...

The M9ti is nice enough to me, but it is something that I cannot relate to owning. As far as the X100 ... the VF is huge for a lot of us... that, the dedicated knobs / dials, and the larger sensor makes it far more desirable to me than the u4/3 with their convoluted menus and non-dedicated dials.
 
A stupid LED brightline when put on a Leica it is an interesting innovation.

A innovating idea of hybrid OVF/EVF when put on a Fujifilm, it is a complicated viewfinder.
And when the lens and sensor are engineered to optimize each other, it is a novelty fixed lens camera.

I bet you would say a Leica X1 with dinosaur skin would be more innovating than the X100.
Austerby said:
Am I the only here who thinks this?

I was really impressed with the M9 titanium - brings M cameras up-to-date, interesting innovation yet retaining the core functionality of the classic Leica. A brilliant piece of design IMHO.

The X100 I don't get - it's not retro styled as much as a reproduction piece. I can't see what it adds on top of the current range of m4/3rds cameras apart from the rather complicated viewfinder. It also seems expensive for a novelty fixed lens camera.

This does seem a contrarian view to the members of this forum - does anyone care/dare to agree with me?
Click to expand...
 
My 12 year old Ricoh GR-1 has illuminated framelines, and that Leica (which looks like a titanium turd, as do many of the Audis from the same designer) adds no functionality whatsoever to the basic M design.

Contrast the Leica S2 - an absolutely gorgeous camera. And the finder system in the X-100 is truly, deeply innovative -- more so than anything Leica's done on a camera since the M3.
 
Last edited:
Re: the x100...
I'd say the styling means very little to me, but honestly, when I see it in hand, it looks so much like something I've been shooting with for years that I already feel comfortable with it.
As to the menu, if they'd give me an iso dial sitting around the shutter dial, they could pretty much dispense with the other controls and I'd be very happy. No need to worry about intuitive menus when all the shooting controls are on dials/aperture rings.

If you dispense with the $20k + difference in price, I guess the M9t would be an easy choice. If only I could find a way of "dispensing" with $20k. I can't even do it as an intellectual exercise, much less a practical matter.

Amazing to me that in your first post, you only mention the price of the X100 as high.
 
I feel that the x100 is just a retro styled Ricoh pns. Nothing revolutionary. But then, APS-C sensor, digital, compact body, fast 35mm lens and the design just sounds nice...
 
Austerby said:
The X100 I don't get - it's not retro styled as much as a reproduction piece. I can't see what it adds on top of the current range of m4/3rds cameras apart from the rather complicated viewfinder. It also seems expensive for a novelty fixed lens camera.
Click to expand...

As far as Leica, they are a sad parody of themselves at this point. I'm not sure how you can be serious, unless you are an embarrassingly rich Japanese collector. They will surely love the titanium body, leather from an Audi, and an LED for only $30,000. Breathtaking innovation. You do realize you could own a whole Audi to go along with your 1-inch finger strap for that much money.

Are you sure this whole thing isn't sarcasm? Sony just introduced a 24mm f2.0 lens with a list price of $1249.99. That doesn't come with a camera attached.

And the Leica X1 is $2000. And a stop slower. I'm starting to feel silly typing. I will stop now.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom