The banding at high ISO is the only serious issue as far as I am concerned.
The fact that the camera is electronic shutter only is obviously well documented and internal memory only and minimal controls are non-issues in my opinion.
If Pixii wants this camera to succeed they will need to start working with influencers...
i know this might come across as a crazy idea...but how about achieving success by creating a good product?
The product is what it is. These guys also listed the Leica SL3-S and the Sigma BF amongst the 3 worst cameras of 2025. Obviously these are good products. If they are not for you just move on.
What I was trying to say was that if Pixii provided a camera for review and flew them to Besançon, things for sure would be phrased differently, even with a negative review.
Well, I’ve got to agree on the SL3-S. I could *almost* see a place for it even though it’s a S5ii clone. But in a world where the S1ii exists, the SL3-S doesn’t make sense to me, personally.
SlowDriver wrote:
The product is what it is. These guys also listed the Leica SL3-S and the Sigma BF amongst the 3 worst cameras of 2025. Obviously these are good products. If they are not for you just move on.
What I was trying to say was that if Pixii provided a camera for review and flew them to Besançon, things for sure would be phrased differently, even with a negative review.
I’m not sure it goes that far, but it’s true that as long as Pixii is a small brand, PetaPixel can say whatever it wants. Unlike with the big brands, they have nothing to lose.
SlowDriver wrote:
The product is what it is. These guys also listed the Leica SL3-S and the Sigma BF amongst the 3 worst cameras of 2025. Obviously these are good products. If they are not for you just move on.
What I was trying to say was that if Pixii provided a camera for review and flew them to Besançon, things for sure would be phrased differently, even with a negative review.
again, this may come as a surprise...but not all camera buyers make decisions based on what a YT personality has to say about them. that said, PetaPixel listed out _facts_ why the camera is flawed...even "phrased differently" a bad product is a bad product.
dalegaspi wrote:
again, this may come as a surprise...but not all camera buyers make decisions based on what a YT personality has to say about them. that said, PetaPixel listed out _facts_ why the camera is flawed...even "phrased differently" a bad product is a bad product.
It is not a mature product yet, that is clear, and whether it will ever reach maturity remains to be seen, that being said I don't believe it is a bad product as is either, as mentioned the banding would disturb me, the rest are non-issues for me personally. FWIW, the only decent Pixii review I have ever read is the one from Joerg-Peter Rau on Macfilos. It is in my opinion a very balanced review: https://www.macfilos.com/2023/04/17/new-kid-on-the-block-the-pixii-rangefinder-camera-review-gives-you-the-full-story/
I was curious and watched the review. A lot of issues ...
- internal memory only
- shutter button hard to press
- no mechanical shutter
- bad shutter sound
- "status" light ... why?
- slow startup
- poor quality screen
- poor battery
- cold shoe only
- annoying error messages
- manual input of focal length after lens changes
- dark rangefinder patch
- no way to shoot both DNG & jpg
- banding at high ISO
- no review screen?
SlowDriver wrote:
It is not a mature product yet, that is clear, and whether it will ever reach maturity remains to be seen, that being said I don't believe it is a bad product as is either, as mentioned the banding would disturb me, the rest are non-issues for me personally. FWIW, the only decent Pixii review I have ever read is the one from Joerg-Peter Rau on Macfilos. It is in my opinion a very balanced review: https://www.macfilos.com/2023/04/17/new-kid-on-the-block-the-pixii-rangefinder-camera-review-gives-you-the-full-story/
wut.
how can anyone say this is not a bad product? never mind the lack of screen and external storage, heck...i'd even give them a pass on that banding in shadows in high ISO...but good god it's the same abysmal shutter mechanism and subpar rangefinder experience they haven't really managed to improve since their first product release back in 2018...
it doesn't have a screen yet the wireless integration is not very good and slow...note that the Leica M-D has no screen either...but Leica's FOTOS mobile app is top tier ...easy to use and seamless connectivity with the camera (unless you have a sh_tty Android phone) so you can actually use the app to compansate the lack of screen on the M-D...
oh boy don't get me started with the batteries...the almost-two-decades-old Leica M9 actually manages more shots in one charge than this thing (300 to 500 shots with the M9 vs 100 to 200 on the Pixii Max)
also, no hot shoe for even limited flash support? i mean.. i get it, it's electronic-shutter only and has molasses-like readout to be able to sync with flash on high shutter speeds. but FFS it's 2026. it should support flash even with slow shutter speeds...imagine offering a camera in the digital age but cannot offer flash support that decades old analog Leicas can support!
and a starting price at $4500? are you kidding me? i honestly want this thing to succeed, but after almost a decade, they seem to be too stubborn with their design choices.
It would be great to have some competition for Leica but honestly, at 4500 bucks this thing is competing with a very nice condition used M10 and I have a hard time seeing what it brings to the table over the Leica option.
For an unfavorable review, it left out the part about color shift in the corners with 28mm lenses and wider. That’s the main weakness of the Pixii for me.
raizans wrote:
For an unfavorable review, it left out the part about color shift in the corners with 28mm lenses and wider. That’s the main weakness of the Pixii for me.
I agree, though it might also affect 35mm, but it has been a while since I’ve examined this. In any case, it has been noticeable in all of the wider angle user photos I’ve seen from this camera.
I think the colour shift is due to cover glass thickness resulting in uneven IR absorption. Steeper light ray angles towards the image periphery travel farther through the IR absorbing cover glass than on-axis rays, resulting in uneven IR blocking that appears as cyan-blue colour shift.
I guess the review seemed harsh but I think all the points were valid. I think there of course is some bias as I doubt they would say this about a big manufacturer, but then again I doubt a big manufacturer like Nikon, canon, etc would release a product with this many, let’s call them “quirks”. I would also say that this unit cost almost 5k, so I feel like I should not complain ans much about Leica charging 9k, for a digital M that cost 8-9k. If doesn’t have these issues and performs better so you pay for what you get. There doesn’t seem to be a way to get wha leica does without paying for it. I’m not sure I want to pay 9k but I can see that is not all just massive profit. Even the optical rangefinder may actually be a very expensive part and maybe we take the excellent Leica RF quality for granted sometimes and that they deliver it for the price they do. But it’s still expensive lol. A used m10 or even a previous digital M does better then this camera for less.
The review didn't seem harsh to me, I think just contemporary baseline for camera and lens reviews is usually a borderline ad so this one seems more honest.
I would really like Pixii to dump their (subpar) rangefinder and come up with a contender for the MEV1. No need for any display, just try implementing IBIS and auto-magnification when the focusing ring is turned. Make it half the price of the Leica and I think there is a market for it.
I get where the review came from. Judged against "normal" cameras, the Pixii does not make sense. No screen, no autofocus, no hotshoe; how can you even compare such a thing against CaSoNikon?
On the other hand, that's clearly not what the Pixii is trying to do. It's after a particular experience that is quite unique. Having tried one for the last few weeks I find it incredibly compelling. There's a particular brand of simplicity that the Pixii does better than even Leica. It truly feels analog when shooting, with no screen whatsoever for chimping, while remaining very modern in styling.
For what it's worth, I did not experience any banding on my model. In fact, its shadow recovery was quite astonishing. But I had some frames digitally corrupted and a few severely overexposed for no reason. These are obvious software errors that do need fixing.
Otherwise, the battery life seemed sufficient to me, the shutter button and sound were good, I wasn't too bothered by the internal memory or the menu system. These things are all working as intended, and frankly work fine. I would like a faster startup, and the frame lines were too bright at night. But those are minor gripes to me.
Overall, I found it a hugely engaging camera. I'm in contact with Pixii about the file corruption; that's really my main concern. Otherwise, the camera is great fun, and unique. Of course you can't compare it against a Sony, or even Leica. But what it's trying to do, it does better than anything else, in my opinion.
But, that thing is extremely specific. It happens to appeal to me, but I totally get how Chris Nicchols (the reviewer) did not get along with it. Neither does my Leicaphile friend. To be fair, I think the review said as much; this is a camera for a very particular niche with very narrow appeal.
bastibe wrote:
I get where the review came from. Judged against "normal" cameras, the Pixii does not make sense. No screen, no autofocus, no hotshoe; how can you even compare such a thing against CaSoNikon?
On the other hand, that's clearly not what the Pixii is trying to do. It's after a particular experience that is quite unique. Having tried one for the last few weeks I find it incredibly compelling. There's a particular brand of simplicity that the Pixii does better than even Leica. It truly feels analog when shooting, with no screen whatsoever for chimping, while remaining very modern in styling.
For what it's worth, I did not experience any banding on my model. In fact, its shadow recovery was quite astonishing. But I had some frames digitally corrupted and a few severely overexposed for no reason. These are obvious software errors that do need fixing.
Otherwise, the battery life seemed sufficient to me, the shutter button and sound were good, I wasn't too bothered by the internal memory or the menu system. These things are all working as intended, and frankly work fine. I would like a faster startup, and the frame lines were too bright at night. But those are minor gripes to me.
Overall, I found it a hugely engaging camera. I'm in contact with Pixii about the file corruption; that's really my main concern. Otherwise, the camera is great fun, and unique. Of course you can't compare it against a Sony, or even Leica. But what it's trying to do, it does better than anything else, in my opinion.
But, that thing is extremely specific. It happens to appeal to me, but I totally get how Chris Nicchols (the reviewer) did not get along with it. Neither does my Leicaphile friend. To be fair, I think the review said as much; this is a camera for a very particular niche with very narrow appeal. ...Show more →
I don’t think they’re really comparing this camera to Nikon or Sony, but rather to Leicas, which is a fair assessment since they’re in the same market segment. Considering you can buy a used Leica M10 with a one-year guarantee, it’s hard to justify the Pixii given all the ongoing issues. I was very curious about getting one, but after reading all the reviews and comments on social media, I didn’t want to spend that much money just to be a beta tester.
Malabito wrote:
I don’t think they’re really comparing this camera to Nikon or Sony, but rather to Leicas, which is a fair assessment since they’re in the same market segment.
Having used both a Leica M and a Pixii, I find them oddly dissimilar. Of course they're both digital rangefinders, and that's already a very small niche. But within that niche, they're quite different.
Leica builds the best camera s possible within the rangefinder framework. They have deep menus, many buttons, screens, visoflexes, the works. At the same time, they remain staunchly traditional to their enormous heritage.
Pixii does the opposite. They're the simplest camera possible that's still usable. They take away as much as possible, and leave something beautifully reduced, a sort of raw core of a camera almost entirely devoid of digitalia. At the same time, they thoughtfully added modern touches such as an in-viewfinder menu system, or the fully-USB connectivity.
Your point is of course still entirely valid. The Pixii is even more niche than a Leica M, and the technical problems are disturbing to say the least.
