hausen
Well-known
I had a little accident over the weekend, I dropped my M9 + 28/2 into the harbour and even though I am fully insured and at replacement value, the insurance company is making noises about not fully covering my M9.
My question is though I wonder how XP1 owners feel about their camera choice now you have used it for a period of time?
I use my M9 as a 'shoot everything' camera. I shoot a lot of landscapes, Panoramas with Leica 28/2.8 SA, Long exposure, portraits of friends and my kids and walk around on the street.
If I don't get all the insurance money I can get XP1 + all lenses and maybe RX1 for when I would like a full frame option for less than the M240 body. Have always been a Leica guy but now I wonder if XP1 might be a smarter choice.
Not looking to bash Leica or Leica pricing but just have an opportunity to review my gear and wondered what you might think if you were me.
My question is though I wonder how XP1 owners feel about their camera choice now you have used it for a period of time?
I use my M9 as a 'shoot everything' camera. I shoot a lot of landscapes, Panoramas with Leica 28/2.8 SA, Long exposure, portraits of friends and my kids and walk around on the street.
If I don't get all the insurance money I can get XP1 + all lenses and maybe RX1 for when I would like a full frame option for less than the M240 body. Have always been a Leica guy but now I wonder if XP1 might be a smarter choice.
Not looking to bash Leica or Leica pricing but just have an opportunity to review my gear and wondered what you might think if you were me.
back alley
IMAGES
leaving leica of it...
i am loving my xp1/xe1 combo...great image quality which i assume will improve a bit when i can shoot/process raw...the lenses are great, light, sharp...even the zoom is a treat.
i am loving my xp1/xe1 combo...great image quality which i assume will improve a bit when i can shoot/process raw...the lenses are great, light, sharp...even the zoom is a treat.
willie_901
Veteran
I hope your insurance company fulfills their obligation. Replacement value coverage means they replace it. You may have a deductible though.
I think the M9 and the XP1 are very different.
The main difference operationally is likely to be the finder. The XP1 is primarily an AF camera. You can use the AF manually and focus and recompose as you would use the M9. Of course you can mount M lenses and focus without using the AF at all. In this case I would think you would have to use the 3X and 10X zoom for at least some of the time. I can't see how using the XP1 with M lenses would as satisfying as using an analog rangefinder. Overall the firmware improvements and your experience with analog rangefinders should make focusing a non-issue using AF with the Fuji lenses.
Another huge inference is the XP1 is more complicated to operate because there are two ways to use the finder and numerous ways to implement AF. Once you understand when to use the camera's most effective mode for the task at hand, the complexity is not an issue.
The 35/1.4 XF lens is excellent. The 18/2 is very good, but it is not as nice as the 35. I don't see how the 18/2 can be as good as the Leica 28 considering the price difference. More Fuji lenses are on the way in 2013 and Zeiss is releasing three AF lenses in XF mount as well.
I really like the results from the 35/1.4 XF lens. The files are great. They are at least as good as the D700 and I like the XF 35/1.4 results better than those from the modern Nikkor lenses. The camera's dynamic range is impressive for an APS-C sensor and the raw files really retain highlight detail which enables you to bias exposure for the shadows. No doubt the M9 files are very nice as well.
I suspect you could find a used M9 body with a warranty for a reasonable pice. The Lleica 28/2 lens may be more difficult to source. I hope you can try or even rent a XP1 before you have to make a decision.
I think the M9 and the XP1 are very different.
The main difference operationally is likely to be the finder. The XP1 is primarily an AF camera. You can use the AF manually and focus and recompose as you would use the M9. Of course you can mount M lenses and focus without using the AF at all. In this case I would think you would have to use the 3X and 10X zoom for at least some of the time. I can't see how using the XP1 with M lenses would as satisfying as using an analog rangefinder. Overall the firmware improvements and your experience with analog rangefinders should make focusing a non-issue using AF with the Fuji lenses.
Another huge inference is the XP1 is more complicated to operate because there are two ways to use the finder and numerous ways to implement AF. Once you understand when to use the camera's most effective mode for the task at hand, the complexity is not an issue.
The 35/1.4 XF lens is excellent. The 18/2 is very good, but it is not as nice as the 35. I don't see how the 18/2 can be as good as the Leica 28 considering the price difference. More Fuji lenses are on the way in 2013 and Zeiss is releasing three AF lenses in XF mount as well.
I really like the results from the 35/1.4 XF lens. The files are great. They are at least as good as the D700 and I like the XF 35/1.4 results better than those from the modern Nikkor lenses. The camera's dynamic range is impressive for an APS-C sensor and the raw files really retain highlight detail which enables you to bias exposure for the shadows. No doubt the M9 files are very nice as well.
I suspect you could find a used M9 body with a warranty for a reasonable pice. The Lleica 28/2 lens may be more difficult to source. I hope you can try or even rent a XP1 before you have to make a decision.