M8 vs. X100 files

Teuthida

Well-known
Local time
10:11 PM
Joined
Aug 13, 2011
Messages
622
Probably been posted b4. Whatever.

Prefaced by saying I'm not an "IQ Guy" i.e. "image quality" is low on my list of photographic priorities. I've been perfectly happy to shoot Tri-X with $200 Nikkor AI primes for the last 30 years.

That being said, I've just bought an X100 and have had the chance to compare image quality with the files from my lowly, antiquated M8 with a few VC lenses.

At base ISO i.e. 320, IMHO the M8 RAW files are consistently better than the X100 files in terms of both detail and dynamic range. Over 640 ISO, the X100 wins, and its not close.

This isn't a slam on the X100. I like the camera, quirks and all, and it produces very nice files. But buying it brought home to me just how good the M8 continues to be. And I['m not a "Leica Guy".

One thing I do like about the X100, as opposed to the M8, is the fixed lens and thus the lesser potential for dirtying the sensor. For some reason, my M8 sensor gets dirty more than any other digital camera I've ever used.
 
I just bought an x10 to accompany my m8 and I totally agree. The x10 is nothing compared to the m8. I bought it because there are obviously some things that the m8 aren't meant for. Particularly shooting on the streets at night- auto focus for those rainy days while walking around with an umbrella. Glad I have it as a backup cam.
 
Back
Top Bottom