Landberg
Well-known
Hi!
I have been shooting film Leicas for the last couple of years. When i decided to switch to digital i did what a lot of people do, i bought a Fuji X. I first tried the Fuji X-Pro 1 with a 27mm and a 18mm. The pictures looks good but the camera is too slow. Even if i shoot manual there is a lag where the camera adjust the aperture blades or something. There is no feeling at all when manual focusing a Fuji x-pro1. And the AF is so slow.
I now bought a Fuji X100t because folks on internet forums say that it is really close to shoot a Leica. But it's not! The x100t is also slow and have a shutter lag at fully manual. Also the manual focus is bad because of the focus by wire. Sure, the pictures are great and the AF is good in good light.
But still, shooting with a film Leica spoiled me. Sadly the only option with a rangefinder/ovf is a digital Leica. Having already spent $2900 on the Fuji x100t and the X-pro1 i thought that i could sell them and by a used Lieca M9. In my search i found a brand new M-E for $3300. I sold my gear including my film leicas and bought it. And WOW. Sure, its old, has a bad ISO (after 1600) and a crappy screen but it is responsive and does what i expect from a camera.
I may just be old fashion but i like to put the M-E in manual and shoot, no A, T or P mode. Meter with a handheld meter and when i click the shutter button it takes the picture. Leica film cameras are still in a world of its own but the digital M is close.
Maybe this post is boring, sloppy written and unnecessary but it may give some guidance for people in the same position.
/Rikard
I have been shooting film Leicas for the last couple of years. When i decided to switch to digital i did what a lot of people do, i bought a Fuji X. I first tried the Fuji X-Pro 1 with a 27mm and a 18mm. The pictures looks good but the camera is too slow. Even if i shoot manual there is a lag where the camera adjust the aperture blades or something. There is no feeling at all when manual focusing a Fuji x-pro1. And the AF is so slow.
I now bought a Fuji X100t because folks on internet forums say that it is really close to shoot a Leica. But it's not! The x100t is also slow and have a shutter lag at fully manual. Also the manual focus is bad because of the focus by wire. Sure, the pictures are great and the AF is good in good light.
But still, shooting with a film Leica spoiled me. Sadly the only option with a rangefinder/ovf is a digital Leica. Having already spent $2900 on the Fuji x100t and the X-pro1 i thought that i could sell them and by a used Lieca M9. In my search i found a brand new M-E for $3300. I sold my gear including my film leicas and bought it. And WOW. Sure, its old, has a bad ISO (after 1600) and a crappy screen but it is responsive and does what i expect from a camera.
I may just be old fashion but i like to put the M-E in manual and shoot, no A, T or P mode. Meter with a handheld meter and when i click the shutter button it takes the picture. Leica film cameras are still in a world of its own but the digital M is close.
Maybe this post is boring, sloppy written and unnecessary but it may give some guidance for people in the same position.
/Rikard
tuanvinh2000
Well-known
Thanks Rikard. I appreciate the experience sharing. i agree that a camera should be responsive. i settle on a sony + M adapter then manual focus with M mount lens and zone focus. when i trip the shutter it goes! but for accurate focusing i have to do the zoom in/out to focus. its a bit slower than a digital M but good for what i need it to be. still shoot a film M along with it though.
aizan
Veteran
yup...if you like snapping off shots using the same techniques as winogrand, leicas are still the only cameras that work.
Landberg
Well-known
Yes!
I don't defend the price or the crappy LCD but it is the way i like to shoot. And spending money on Fujis, or other brands chasing the same experience is not that economic either.
I don't defend the price or the crappy LCD but it is the way i like to shoot. And spending money on Fujis, or other brands chasing the same experience is not that economic either.
B-9
Devin Bro
I had a similar road traveled to an M8.
First the Fuji X100 then a XPro, I then went to the Epson RD-1s (stellar camera) followed by a stint with a Leica X1 before taking the plunge on a used M8.
My background before was Leica film bodies (M3's mostly) with the occasionally Nikon DSLR when a family wedding or the like arose.
After a few months with the M8, the whole digital M romance has started to wear off, truth be told they are heavy and obviously lack that mechanical connection between you and the camera. The ISO performance on the M8 is really horrid, even at base ISO with longer exposures (-1/25) show healthy noise. It's ok, it's looks ok, it's easy to look at a LCD, but I don't own a computer (IPhone 5s?) to really get the full potential of the camera with RAW files, I've been using JPEG fine to print and share. (IMO is fine up to 11x14)
I've been thinking more and more about retreating back to my happy place with a M3. I love the lenses I have now and really wouldn't think of going to another system, so it seems like a logical choice, if I ever make it.
I'm glad you're getting along with the M-E, and I can imagine it's a league better than my older M8 on most of the issues I have. Let's see some photos!?
Sorry for the rant!
First the Fuji X100 then a XPro, I then went to the Epson RD-1s (stellar camera) followed by a stint with a Leica X1 before taking the plunge on a used M8.
My background before was Leica film bodies (M3's mostly) with the occasionally Nikon DSLR when a family wedding or the like arose.
After a few months with the M8, the whole digital M romance has started to wear off, truth be told they are heavy and obviously lack that mechanical connection between you and the camera. The ISO performance on the M8 is really horrid, even at base ISO with longer exposures (-1/25) show healthy noise. It's ok, it's looks ok, it's easy to look at a LCD, but I don't own a computer (IPhone 5s?) to really get the full potential of the camera with RAW files, I've been using JPEG fine to print and share. (IMO is fine up to 11x14)
I've been thinking more and more about retreating back to my happy place with a M3. I love the lenses I have now and really wouldn't think of going to another system, so it seems like a logical choice, if I ever make it.
I'm glad you're getting along with the M-E, and I can imagine it's a league better than my older M8 on most of the issues I have. Let's see some photos!?
Sorry for the rant!
jaapv
RFF Sponsoring Member.
Without wanting to sound snarky, doing digital photography without going to the trouble of proper postprocessing is worse than dropping off your film at the local drugstore for an el-cheapo develop and print. You'll never get the real quality of the camera, not even close by a mile. If one is not prepared to accept that half the making of a digital photograph is computer work - and there is nothing wrong with not wanting to sit in front of a screen- one is far better off using film.
Landberg
Well-known
I have nothing against working on a computer. When shooting film i developed my film by myself but then i scanned the film and worked with it the same way as i do with digital. I'm just talking about taking the picture.
Faintandfuzzy
Well-known
I'm curious. You found the Fuji AF slow. How fast exactly is the Leica AF?
Richard G
Veteran
This is a significant argument, along the lines of Mike Johnston's "Letter to George" at The Online Photographer. I might just have bought the Fuji X-Pro 1 in 2012. Then I would have bought more lenses. Then I would have moved up to the XT. And then more lenses. And would I eventually have moved to Nikon....or Canon....? So I bought an M9-P. All my old lenses were still in play, and no need of any new ones. My children's sports long lens stuff were shot on film with the old OM2n and f4 200mm, but in fact for rugby and basketball I found manual focus with the Leica and a 50 worked remarkably well. I will almost certainly never have a DSLR, and all the latest gear can just pass me by. With a 57 year old M2 and a three year old M9-P, no longer the latest model either being 6 years from release, I am coping. Indeed, I am happy.
kuuan
loves old lenses
having a camera that takes AF lenses doesn't mean one 'has' to by those. I have Sony NEX5n and A7 and the only native AF lenses I have for them are the bundled kit zooms I had bought along the cameras for close to nothing, and use adapted manual, mostly RF lenses. These cameras are snappy
Landberg
Well-known
I zone/scale focus so it is instant.
Landberg
Well-known
I belive you! But if you want OVF/RF there are not that many options.
B-9
Devin Bro
Fuji AF is slow, a Nikon N90 has faster response with a D lens, that's sad considering the age gap.
Fly by wire manual focus with the Fujis is useless, it's that bad and worse, sorry!
I unfortunately agree with you Jaap*,
Computers have evolved so much since I was really interested, and the programs are so beyond me as far as patience.
I guess digital isn't always a cure-all for laziness
Fly by wire manual focus with the Fujis is useless, it's that bad and worse, sorry!
I unfortunately agree with you Jaap*,
Computers have evolved so much since I was really interested, and the programs are so beyond me as far as patience.
I guess digital isn't always a cure-all for laziness
majid
Fazal Majid
Well, I have a foot in both camps (M240,X-T1, X-Pro1 and X100S, although I am going to sell the latter two to cushion the blow from a RX1RII).
The X-T1 is the camera I actually use most often. AF is lightning quick, and MF using peaking is just as fast as a RF, and more accurate to boot. It is really a big jump over the X-Pro1/X-E1. Image quality is not quite as good as the M240 due to the APS-C sensor, but they got almost everything right in that camera (my only gripe would be the non-locking exposure compensation dial). I dream of a X-T1 success using a X-Trans version of the Sony A7RII sensor and the Leica SL EVF, but it looks like Fuji unwisely made a lens mount that is unsuited for full-frame.
The X-T1 is the camera I actually use most often. AF is lightning quick, and MF using peaking is just as fast as a RF, and more accurate to boot. It is really a big jump over the X-Pro1/X-E1. Image quality is not quite as good as the M240 due to the APS-C sensor, but they got almost everything right in that camera (my only gripe would be the non-locking exposure compensation dial). I dream of a X-T1 success using a X-Trans version of the Sony A7RII sensor and the Leica SL EVF, but it looks like Fuji unwisely made a lens mount that is unsuited for full-frame.
fireblade
Vincenzo.
lol....I was curious as well, but sometimes best not to engage.
Landberg
Well-known
aizan
Veteran
i wonder if autofocus will ever be good enough to replace scale and zone focusing for instant snapping...
uhoh7
Veteran
Basically the Fujis are Nex5s dressed in a Leica costume, with some nice native lens options, and much better use of the onboard tools to make nice OOC images.
They are very good, and that's why so many love them.
But if you crave 'pure photography', you are not going to be happy in the long run. They are very good for Leica though, because the Fuijis are a gateway drug to serious M addiction.
For some anyway
You are so knowledgable, such a silly generalization is funny to hear.
The whole goal of the modern digital camera should be to provide an image which does not need post processing. We only need it when the attempt has failed. This admittedly is very frequent.
What part of the "real quality of the camera" am I missing here, with no post from the M9 and 28 cron?
Golden Trailer by unoh7, on Flickr
I suspect you may be selling this concept, perhaps unconsciously, because the new SL (of which I am a fan), produces extremely dull RAWs (check DPR), which do clean up beautifully (check FM SL threads), after the shooter sacrifices a portion of their limited life on the planet to do the work which should have come straight from the computers on the camera.
That the newer digital Leicas are even further from film in this respect makes me suspect it's not a priority to put resources toward. Much cheaper to have you tell us we should have to do it all.
They are very good, and that's why so many love them.
But if you crave 'pure photography', you are not going to be happy in the long run. They are very good for Leica though, because the Fuijis are a gateway drug to serious M addiction.
For some anyway
You are so knowledgable, such a silly generalization is funny to hear.
The whole goal of the modern digital camera should be to provide an image which does not need post processing. We only need it when the attempt has failed. This admittedly is very frequent.
What part of the "real quality of the camera" am I missing here, with no post from the M9 and 28 cron?
Golden Trailer by unoh7, on Flickr
I suspect you may be selling this concept, perhaps unconsciously, because the new SL (of which I am a fan), produces extremely dull RAWs (check DPR), which do clean up beautifully (check FM SL threads), after the shooter sacrifices a portion of their limited life on the planet to do the work which should have come straight from the computers on the camera.
That the newer digital Leicas are even further from film in this respect makes me suspect it's not a priority to put resources toward. Much cheaper to have you tell us we should have to do it all.
Range-rover
Veteran
I did the same as you I purchased a Fuji but a XE-1 and using it with a Minolta M
28mm and I started using it like a Leica and after awhile I just forget I'll just sell
the Fuji and I got a M8 and I'm being back it Leica is like finding that long lost
friend. That is a great shot above!
28mm and I started using it like a Leica and after awhile I just forget I'll just sell
the Fuji and I got a M8 and I'm being back it Leica is like finding that long lost
friend. That is a great shot above!
derekfulmer
Member
A pretty pertinent thread for me. I've long loved the Fuji X system, and have always lusted after Leica's. I think for simplicity and enjoyment, personally, lies in the Leica system. Though cost prohibitive at the moment, I'll build something piecemeal. An x100s or Ricoh GR would serve as my digital body until I can spring for an M-E or Typ 240. An M4 is what I plan to jump into the M world with.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk