Redseele
Established
Hi everyone,
I'm seriously thinking about giving up on my Leica M9 and instead of downgrading to an M8 or M8.2 I'm contemplating going to a much cheaper camera, the Fuji X-E series. Nothing wrong with the camera, I'm thinking about going back to being mostly a film photographer (long story I will make a post about it someplace else).
Before having (since February this year) gone the path of the digital Leica (R-D1 to M8 to M9) I used to have an X-E1 that I used with my Leica lenses (I thought it was alright, although I always thought the focusing was rather slow as I couldn't see the focus peaking contrast thing very well). As I said before, I consider myself mostly a film Leica shooter and therefore I do not want to use Fuji's fantastically sharp auto focus lenses. Now that I'm thinking about going back to Fuji, I was wondering if I should just buy another X-E1 or if I should upgrade to the X-E2.
So my question: is there any benefit the X-E2 has over the X-E1 for people who do not use Fuji lenses and only shoot manually?
Thank you.
I'm seriously thinking about giving up on my Leica M9 and instead of downgrading to an M8 or M8.2 I'm contemplating going to a much cheaper camera, the Fuji X-E series. Nothing wrong with the camera, I'm thinking about going back to being mostly a film photographer (long story I will make a post about it someplace else).
Before having (since February this year) gone the path of the digital Leica (R-D1 to M8 to M9) I used to have an X-E1 that I used with my Leica lenses (I thought it was alright, although I always thought the focusing was rather slow as I couldn't see the focus peaking contrast thing very well). As I said before, I consider myself mostly a film Leica shooter and therefore I do not want to use Fuji's fantastically sharp auto focus lenses. Now that I'm thinking about going back to Fuji, I was wondering if I should just buy another X-E1 or if I should upgrade to the X-E2.
So my question: is there any benefit the X-E2 has over the X-E1 for people who do not use Fuji lenses and only shoot manually?
Thank you.
f16sunshine
Moderator
Maybe
The refresh rate of the XE2 finder is much better which should make actual mechanical focusing more "real time" responsive.
I use XE1 bodies with the Fuji lenses in manual focus with the "snap focus" technique and, I could not really appreciete an improvement in the XE2 using that method(ael/afl button to focus).
If I was actually twisting a lens and looking for the perfect point of focus the finder refreshing "cleaner" would make a difference I'm sure (as the XE2 does).
Personally, if you are only using your M lenses,.... look at a full frame Sony A7 model.
I've followed your threads on which 50mm and other lens subjects.
For a 35-50 user the Sony is going to offer you better use of your lenses.
The Fuji system is great for it's lenses and the compact weight the overall system offers. Taking away those lenses .... why bother with a cropped sensor body ?
FrankS
Registered User
Firmware upgrade may be available for current xe2 and perhaps not the xe1.
Redseele
Established
I think the reason I'm not too convinced by the A7 is that it's too complicated. I really don't like the loud shutter either. If anything the X-E series seem a much better compromise coming from a Leica (film) world. As I said, I used Fujis before and I think I am comfortable with them already. Thank you for the advice though. I might look into it as a possibility.
Godfrey
somewhat colored
I found the A7 did passably well with Leica R lenses and with much less consistency using Leica M lenses. Particularly wides. I gave up on it. I'd stick with the M9 if that's what I had in your circumstance. I nearly sold mind several times, didn't... I went to the M-P typ 240 when the M9 needed a sensor; I love it. That and the M4-2 are what I'll use for a long time to come, in the Leica lens world. I am also using Nikon lenses on Nikon F6 (film) and D750 (digital) bodies.
It's hard to say what your motivations for selling off or 'downgrading' the M9 might be, other than possibly money. If you want to shoot film only for a while, don't bother with the Fuji adaptation stuff, just shoot film and put the M9 in a drawer for when you want to do digital work. You won't find anything else as simple and as "film like" to use. After years of experimentation and mixing up lenses and bodies, my experience proves that, for me, it's best to use the lenses designed for a camera and not bother with all the fuss of adaptation. It never works as well as hoped.
Unless there's some very compelling motivation to sell off gear (been there, done that, still doing it), holding onto good gear that you have while using the gear that you want to makes more sense than any switching around to other equipment.
G
It's hard to say what your motivations for selling off or 'downgrading' the M9 might be, other than possibly money. If you want to shoot film only for a while, don't bother with the Fuji adaptation stuff, just shoot film and put the M9 in a drawer for when you want to do digital work. You won't find anything else as simple and as "film like" to use. After years of experimentation and mixing up lenses and bodies, my experience proves that, for me, it's best to use the lenses designed for a camera and not bother with all the fuss of adaptation. It never works as well as hoped.
Unless there's some very compelling motivation to sell off gear (been there, done that, still doing it), holding onto good gear that you have while using the gear that you want to makes more sense than any switching around to other equipment.
G
willie_901
Veteran
The XE-2 is a better choice for two reasons.
1. Its CPU is improved which increases the overall speed pf the camera and the focus aids.
2. I prefer the XTrans II raw to the first generation XTrans raw.
I have used Fujifilm X-Series cameras since the original X100 arrived in the US. But they would not be my choice for M/LTM lenses. If I was determined to use M/LTM lenses I would just stick with your M9.
I recommend the Fujifilm M adapter. since it allows application in-camera adjustments via the menu for distortion, vignetting and color shifts. Of course these can be done with any adapter during post-processing of raw files. I guess the value of the more expensive Fujifilm adapter depends on how much time you might save.
The XE-1 is one of the most cost-effective option out there right now. I use an X-Pro1 often and the first generation raw files get the job done. For many of us the XE-1 would be a wise choice for adapted lenses.
The XE-1 with the Fujinon 27/2.8 and, or 18/2 pancake lens can be used as one would use a RF camera. Obviously the EVF and manual AF operation are completely different. But much of the automation available on the XE cameras can be ignored. For me, the overall experience is similar to a RF film body.
1. Its CPU is improved which increases the overall speed pf the camera and the focus aids.
2. I prefer the XTrans II raw to the first generation XTrans raw.
I have used Fujifilm X-Series cameras since the original X100 arrived in the US. But they would not be my choice for M/LTM lenses. If I was determined to use M/LTM lenses I would just stick with your M9.
I recommend the Fujifilm M adapter. since it allows application in-camera adjustments via the menu for distortion, vignetting and color shifts. Of course these can be done with any adapter during post-processing of raw files. I guess the value of the more expensive Fujifilm adapter depends on how much time you might save.
The XE-1 is one of the most cost-effective option out there right now. I use an X-Pro1 often and the first generation raw files get the job done. For many of us the XE-1 would be a wise choice for adapted lenses.
The XE-1 with the Fujinon 27/2.8 and, or 18/2 pancake lens can be used as one would use a RF camera. Obviously the EVF and manual AF operation are completely different. But much of the automation available on the XE cameras can be ignored. For me, the overall experience is similar to a RF film body.
rbelyell
Well-known
the xe2 has split screen manual focusing and the xe1 does not. it seems, like me, you do not like 'focus peeking' as a manual focus method. therefore, this distinction may be decisive for you.
tony
tony
Ko.Fe.
Lenses 35/21 Gears 46/20
Please, do.
BTW, as film M user, I narrowed it to X-E1 or two, as well, instead of RD, M8 for small digital camera with M-mount lenses.
jazzwave
Well-known
I use X-E1 and M8 for my Leica M lens. M8 produce better BW result but weak In low light, max ISO800 acceptable for me.
But our friend in this forum has small aplikasi to uncompress M8 file and given better IQ in high ISO.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
But our friend in this forum has small aplikasi to uncompress M8 file and given better IQ in high ISO.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Redseele
Established
Hmmm... all of these suggestions have made me think that maybe I should just go back to an M8. I think I really loved the results I got from that camera, particularly when shooting black and white.
One of the reasons I'm a bit afraid of the M9 is because I'm always aware of what an expensive camera it is for how little I want to use it. If it were my only camera, or if I wanted to shoot digital primarily, this would not be a problem at all (I would see it as a good investment).
Anyway, I might try to borrow an X-E2 from someone for a couple of days to see if I get good results compared to an M8 and if I get used to using a digital finder instead of a rangefinder.
Thank you everyone so far for your opinions. They are very appreciated!
One of the reasons I'm a bit afraid of the M9 is because I'm always aware of what an expensive camera it is for how little I want to use it. If it were my only camera, or if I wanted to shoot digital primarily, this would not be a problem at all (I would see it as a good investment).
Anyway, I might try to borrow an X-E2 from someone for a couple of days to see if I get good results compared to an M8 and if I get used to using a digital finder instead of a rangefinder.
Thank you everyone so far for your opinions. They are very appreciated!
