willie_901
Veteran
John,
My X-Pro 1 focusing method is very similar to yours. This works quite week for me too.
My X-Pro 1 focusing method is very similar to yours. This works quite week for me too.
peterm1
Veteran
In a sense this is a difficult question for me to answer as I have never found a camera that matches film Leicas. And this includes digital Leicas. Whilst I feel sure that the latest and greatest M is probably the camera which comes closest. I cant comment as I don't have one.
But I do have an M8 and have to say that while it turns in nice enough images in good light it has many shortcomings that would induce me to not buy one again if I did not already own one. It certainly does not come close to a film M in terms of its "feel" when in use. Apart from not being a low light or natural light (which after all is what film Ms were renowned for) they are clunky - the shutter is a bit grating when pressed (it is anything but smooth like in film Ms) and sounds loud and clunky when fired, even when upgraded firmware is used. The shutter half stop (which is supposed to lock the meter) is almost non existent and impossible to use. Given these shortcomings, would I exchange it for an X-Pro1? For me too another factor is that I am aging and my eyesight is anything but sharp now, and the lack of built in diopter adjustment is also a negative for the M8 but this is something I was aware of before I bought the camera.
I could perhaps be tempted to exchange it for an X-Pro1 but I suspect that if I did so I would be equally disappointed if I was expecting something better than an M8 ie something that had the "feel" of a digital version of a film M if that makes sense. But some people do love this type of "almost" M camera. For example there are still those who love the old Panasonic L1 and LC-1 which were touted as having some of the qualities of the Leica film Ms in terms of user experience. Indeed some years ago I bought a Panasonic L1 and still use it from time to time and find that with its dial based approach to settings is not bad - although now very dated in terms of its sensor etc.
All of which is a rambling and round about way of saying I cant really answer for you. If I did not own an M8 and the chose was between an M8 and an X-Pro 1 I reckon I would go for the latter. But I am really not sure I would go so far as to sell my M8 to buy one.
But I do have an M8 and have to say that while it turns in nice enough images in good light it has many shortcomings that would induce me to not buy one again if I did not already own one. It certainly does not come close to a film M in terms of its "feel" when in use. Apart from not being a low light or natural light (which after all is what film Ms were renowned for) they are clunky - the shutter is a bit grating when pressed (it is anything but smooth like in film Ms) and sounds loud and clunky when fired, even when upgraded firmware is used. The shutter half stop (which is supposed to lock the meter) is almost non existent and impossible to use. Given these shortcomings, would I exchange it for an X-Pro1? For me too another factor is that I am aging and my eyesight is anything but sharp now, and the lack of built in diopter adjustment is also a negative for the M8 but this is something I was aware of before I bought the camera.
I could perhaps be tempted to exchange it for an X-Pro1 but I suspect that if I did so I would be equally disappointed if I was expecting something better than an M8 ie something that had the "feel" of a digital version of a film M if that makes sense. But some people do love this type of "almost" M camera. For example there are still those who love the old Panasonic L1 and LC-1 which were touted as having some of the qualities of the Leica film Ms in terms of user experience. Indeed some years ago I bought a Panasonic L1 and still use it from time to time and find that with its dial based approach to settings is not bad - although now very dated in terms of its sensor etc.
All of which is a rambling and round about way of saying I cant really answer for you. If I did not own an M8 and the chose was between an M8 and an X-Pro 1 I reckon I would go for the latter. But I am really not sure I would go so far as to sell my M8 to buy one.
willie_901
Veteran
Peter,
I understand what you are saying.
Using the X-Pro 1 is a very different experience. While I am happy using a X-Pro 1 for the same purposes as the Zeiss Ikon M body I used to own, I can see how someone else could be miserable. I think culture shock is a useful analogy. Some of us might find living a different culture challenging and stimulating while others might be uncomfortable and unhappy in the same situation.
I understand what you are saying.
Using the X-Pro 1 is a very different experience. While I am happy using a X-Pro 1 for the same purposes as the Zeiss Ikon M body I used to own, I can see how someone else could be miserable. I think culture shock is a useful analogy. Some of us might find living a different culture challenging and stimulating while others might be uncomfortable and unhappy in the same situation.
JohnL
Very confused
Just one further thought: while the XP1 is similar in many ways to the Leica M in purpose and even experience, it is also different enough that most folks will find it unfamiliar at first. I reckon it took me about a couple of months to reach (say) 90% fluency with the XP1 (and I am still working on this). I doubt if anyone could switch from one camera to the other and be working at full efficiency immediately. It takes time.
Waku
Member
Save. Shoot the M8 until it dies. That day, reflect again.
thejameskendall
Established
I desperately wanted a digital M until I bought an X100 and XE-1. Now I never think about them. Autofocus is a bonus for me and the files out of the XE-1 especially are amazing. Better than my D700. That's all I can say really.
aldobonnard
Well-known
I've owned all, and can talk based on experience.
No regret over saying goodbye to the M8. An unfinished product, of mediocre quality (picture wise) and totally unreliable.
The X-Pro is a far better choice than the M8/M9 as concerns picture quality. But for manual focusing, I didn't like it a lot. The focus peaking is not as easy as a true rangefinder. But again, the M8 needed all my lenses to be re-adjusted, in order to focus accurately. With the Fuji, you see the real focus. Big advantage. What you see is what you get.
If you forget the overpriced leica lenses, and stick with the 35/1.4 and 23/1.4 fuji, they are much better lenses than modern leica's, for a fraction of the price, you are better served, in my view.
Only nostalgy can recommend leica M8/M9 over the X series by Fuji.
No regret over saying goodbye to the M8. An unfinished product, of mediocre quality (picture wise) and totally unreliable.
The X-Pro is a far better choice than the M8/M9 as concerns picture quality. But for manual focusing, I didn't like it a lot. The focus peaking is not as easy as a true rangefinder. But again, the M8 needed all my lenses to be re-adjusted, in order to focus accurately. With the Fuji, you see the real focus. Big advantage. What you see is what you get.
If you forget the overpriced leica lenses, and stick with the 35/1.4 and 23/1.4 fuji, they are much better lenses than modern leica's, for a fraction of the price, you are better served, in my view.
Only nostalgy can recommend leica M8/M9 over the X series by Fuji.
Darthfeeble
But you can call me Steve
Had an M8.2, found it very limiting. I've yet to find the end of the Fuji's ability.
B-9
Devin Bro
Coming from film leicas, the Xpro was a natural transition.
There are a lot of good techniques online here, I've barely had to dip into the manual.
I never wanted a camera to replace my Leica, but if ever there was a camera that could make a similar impact on you, it's the Xpro.
I started with the x100, full of doubt, and was a Fuji convert from day one.
The images are stellar, the Fuji glass is top notch to say the least, and it's possibly the most adapted lens friendly camera I've ever used. Retaining most features when using any cheap old adapter.
The Xpro really makes you forget it has a LCD and digital sensor, and really begs to be held and shot. In my opinion, the Xpro is a benchmark that all future cameras should follow, classic style, manual controls, and intuitive menu all make for a simple and familiar style of shooting.
The Xpro is one of the only cameras Ide ever buy twice, and I've only had mine for 2 weeks!
I've been pumping out keepers from day one, this camera has undoubtably opened doors for my photography, and I can already see myself using this guy of years to come.
enjoy your new rig
There are a lot of good techniques online here, I've barely had to dip into the manual.
I never wanted a camera to replace my Leica, but if ever there was a camera that could make a similar impact on you, it's the Xpro.
I started with the x100, full of doubt, and was a Fuji convert from day one.
The images are stellar, the Fuji glass is top notch to say the least, and it's possibly the most adapted lens friendly camera I've ever used. Retaining most features when using any cheap old adapter.
The Xpro really makes you forget it has a LCD and digital sensor, and really begs to be held and shot. In my opinion, the Xpro is a benchmark that all future cameras should follow, classic style, manual controls, and intuitive menu all make for a simple and familiar style of shooting.
The Xpro is one of the only cameras Ide ever buy twice, and I've only had mine for 2 weeks!
I've been pumping out keepers from day one, this camera has undoubtably opened doors for my photography, and I can already see myself using this guy of years to come.
enjoy your new rig
EpicRavenLord
Member
Best of luck with the switch. I went from the R-D1 to XPro1 I only miss the fully manual focusing. The autofocus is acceptable but not as reliable as a photographer with a good rangefinder and sweet manual focus skills. Nothing is worse than missing a shot because the autofocus failed.