fredmiranda.com
Login

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  New Feature: SMS Notification alert
  New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist
  

FM Forums | Leica & Alternative Gear | Join Upload & Sell

1       2              4              6       7       end
  

Archive 2009 · Leica X1 preview samples gallery

  
 
RalphJ
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #1 · Leica X1 preview samples gallery


Let the conspiracy theories roll! (That's what I like about these forums!)

By the way, any of you critics own a Leica? Anyione here put thousands of rolls of film through Leicas? Or is this all secondhand/hearsay?





Nov 06, 2009 at 03:46 PM
Lotusm50
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #2 · Leica X1 preview samples gallery


snowboarder wrote
The problem is Aston Martin is actually an amazing car.



Some of them are. So what? Some are no better than a Jaguar. Some might be worse than the BMW or a Merc. Not really the point though, and nit picking the analogy doesn't really help.

And a Chevrolet Corvette is an amazing cars well, when you come right down to it. Faster than an Aston...

But let me spell out the analogy for you so it clear. You can get roughly equal levels of performance out of a Corvette and an Aston Martin or a Ferrari -- you can argue very fine point about which is faster or handles better but both will get you around a track or around town similarly quickly. Same with a Leica. You can get similar levels of performance out of a M8 and 5D, or an M9 and 5Dll -- you can argue fine point about which one is better, but they are clearly in the same performance league. But as some people will spend much more to get the same performance out of Ferrari as a Corvette, likewise some people will spend more to get their performance out of a Leica than a Canon. Whether the value the materials use, the workmanship, the feel, style, sound or the storied history, as with Ferrari people, so too with Leica.


snowboarder wrote
Leica X1 is NOT an amazing camera. Even if it was cheap I wouldn't buy it.
Ricoh GRIII has a 920K amazing LCD and it's still considered a "luxury" compact for $700...
Leica X1 has an old cr@ppy POS 230K LCD and they want you to believe
they are the best out there so they can charge crazy money for it.



I don't get this at all. The Leica X1 is way ahead of the tiny sensor Ricoh GRIII in terms of IQ. You're deluding yourself with you obvious animosity towards Leica if you think otherwise. I agree than Leica missed a step with the low res LCD, but that has little effect on the resulting quality of the images. Quite frankly, i would have preferred Ricoh to put heir money into a larger sensor rather than a higher res screen. Clearly, the Leica is better built and crafted. I suspect the Leica X1 to have the best, or equal to the best, IQ among compact digital P&S's. But as with Ferrari, you pay extra for the same level of performance. You may not like that, I personally don't like it either, but some people do seem to value the intangibles I suggested above.


snowboarder wroteLook, I'm a big fan of some quite expensive watches. I really admire the craftsmanship and the effort to construct something so small and beautiful, working well for a long time. But I don't pretend a Breitling watch measures time better than a $2 electronic Casio.

Leica wants you to believe their expensive cameras are better. They are not.



They are certainly among the best, if not the best, in every category they operate in -- mostly due to their lenses, but not exclusively. Let's not compare an X1 with a 5Dll, but the cameras it is similar to -- say a Sigma DP2. You would be in a very small, bitter, minority if you don't believe Leica is among the best camera makers with image quality performance that is consistently among the best. I am not a Leica owner, nor do I support them in these pages much at all -- their strategy and decision making I think leave much to be desired, and I think they haven't really hit a home run in a long time -- I criticize them regularly -- yet I do not deny their quality and the image quality they can produce.

With a Ferrari you can get to 100km/h in 4 seconds, just like you can do in a Corvette, but many buyer are willing to pay more because it is the way they get you to 100 km/h in 4 seconds that is important. So too with Leica owners.

Me? I prefer a Lotus. ;-)




Nov 06, 2009 at 05:31 PM
Sam N
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #3 · Leica X1 preview samples gallery


Wow this got pretty ugly.

The problem is there are no DIRECT competitors to the X1.

The DP2 is by far the closest (pretty much same size, similar FOV, same aperture lens, similar sized sensor, same low-res screen, popup flash, etc.), but the DP2 costs less than 1/3 the Leica and is a FAR FAR slower to operate (and probably inferior overall) camera.

You could also compare the above cameras to a GF1+20/1.7, but the GF1 is a system camera so there are a lot of big differences there.

In terms of IQ, you could compare to DSLRs which use the same sensors, but again the SLRs are system cameras (with all the advantages that entails) and don't offer fast contrast-detect focusing or the small size.

All in all, I think the X1 will find its niche and I'm just glad that there are more small cameras with big sensors and good fixed lenses. Hopefully this market will continue to grow and we'll see some good price competition.



Nov 06, 2009 at 05:42 PM
trajan
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #4 · Leica X1 preview samples gallery


Leica X1 has an APS-C sensor, and judging from the pictures, it's below 40d quality, which had an older APS-C sensor. It could be the lens... the lens looks so small...

I really hope it can deliver better, because I would really like an ok camera which I can always carry with me.

--trajan



Nov 06, 2009 at 06:08 PM
Lotusm50
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #5 · Leica X1 preview samples gallery


trajan wrote:
Leica X1 has an APS-C sensor, and judging from the pictures, it's below 40d quality, which had an older APS-C sensor. It could be the lens... the lens looks so small...

I really hope it can deliver better, because I would really like an ok camera which I can always carry with me.



I think we should wait for some real samples to turn up -- dpreview samples are notoriously bad at telling you how good something can be. I think they show potential -- particularly on the noise front, but I'll wait and see about overall quality. I'm sure we'll see some samples here pretty quickly.




Nov 06, 2009 at 06:44 PM
philber
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #6 · Leica X1 preview samples gallery


Fact is, though, that the X1 is by far the most expensive "small camera" on the market. Because of its very high price, it will expected to deliver commensurate "value" for buyers. Which means that it should blow out the water any other small camera in terms of IQ just as its prices overshadows any other. For reference, considering that the X1 has one fixed length lens, for the same money, I could get a Canon T1i (500D) with a fabulous prime, like, for example, a Zeiss Distagon ZE35. And I could also get a similarly sized GF1, which also a large-size-sensor pocket camera (though the sensor is not quite a large as the X1's), also with a fabulous prime, like a Zeiss Biogon 25 or 28. And, of course, the X1 will be required to easily see off the GF1 with a "native" 20 f:1.7 So, because of the price point, expectations are high, and these samples, early thouhg they are, do not look like they have convinced many people. As I said, X1 is a camera I would love to love, but it won't take too many sets of samples like this to get me to move on and, for example, to buy the GF1.


Nov 07, 2009 at 01:29 AM
dave chilvers
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #7 · Leica X1 preview samples gallery


The thing is about Leica, when I owned various film M`s they were truly a camera that you could more or less take anywhere with IQ that most people would die for. I can remember walking around Paris , France with a Leica under my overcoat and several lenses stuck easily in pockets. Returned home to top quality images that won me many a club comp. Yes! I had to pay the premium (more so in those days) but had equipment that would last a lifetime and wouldn`t be superseded at the drop of a hat. There really wasn`t anything else that I found could equal the Leicas in 35mm format.
Today things have changed, it`s just not enough to use top class lenses, you have to have all the top notch electronics and sensors to be able to extract that IQ and I`m afraid that the likes of Canon etc (although I thought that sony would sweep the board being basically an electronics company) are right up there with the best electronics people in the world.
Leicas are still well made like they always were but lets be honest cameras must be one of the fastest upgrades in the world( if not the fastest) so spending two or three times the amount on a camera that is carved from solid is all very well but it will be a paper weight as far as technology goes in 12 months time. I learnt that the hard way buying 1 series Canons and now more or less carry my 5d2 90% of the time.
Like nearly everyone on this board I`ve searched for the elusive small camera that can compete with my DSLR gear but am yet to find a camera that can give me the IQ when enlarging the very occasional grab shot that really worked and should be blown up big on the wall. I always find myself regretting not carrying the bulk when I see the results.
Take the 500D, for moving around when travelling it can be made reasonably small with the lens removed. You can fit the body and a few small primes easily in a small bag on even on ones person and at least have something that might compete when the chips are down and it won`t break the bank( well! at least what you spend will look like something approaching decent value.)
If the better off fancy a Leica then so be it but in this day and age don`t expect it to stay anywhere near the top of the tree for long.
Could I justify a lay out of maybe £10,000 for an M9 and several lenses? maybe, if i wasn`t getting top class results from my 5d2 and a few selected secondhand MF lenses.

Ignore me! it`s the age and the credit crunch



Nov 07, 2009 at 04:50 AM
thrice
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #8 · Leica X1 preview samples gallery


I think Oscar Barnack must've shot snowboarder's dog.


Nov 07, 2009 at 05:32 AM
edwardkaraa
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #9 · Leica X1 preview samples gallery


carstenw wrote:
C'mon Edward, having a bad day? A brand cannot be elitist. Do you mean that the employees are elitist, or the owners, or the CEO, or what? I have seen lots of evidence of exactly the opposite. Sure, there are some misguided owners who let their mouths run amok, but mostly they are a friendly bunch, and quite relaxed.


Wow! I didn't expect my comments to stir the hornet's nest the way they did.

I have nothing against Leica, and actually my comments were not meant in a mean or bad way.

Arrogant and elitist are in the sense that Leica prides itself in making the best products in its category, expensive products that are not meant for everyone. The same can be said about Zeiss. Except that Zeiss tends to price its products incrementally to the quality it makes. Zeiss lenses can very well be 20-50% more expensive than their competitors, but the last time I was interested in purchasing a Leica, the R50/1.4 cost like 2500$, 5 times the price of its nearest competitor. Of course it is unthinkable that the R50/1.4 could be 5 times better than say the Contax 50/1.4.

As I said in my previous post, The X1 doesn't seem to be expensive in Leica's standards. It is only 2 times more expensive than what it normally should sell for. A few years ago, Leica could have asked 5000$ for this camera and get away with it. My Contax T2 that I bought in 1995 for 900$ was way more expensive in comparison.

The M9 seems to be similarly priced. So it seems that Leica understands it cannot command the same prices for products that will become obsolete in 2-3 years time. The lenses however, are another story.




Nov 07, 2009 at 05:53 AM
edwardkaraa
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #10 · Leica X1 preview samples gallery


Tariq Gibran wrote:
I guess I completely disagree with this assumption (at least on this forum) and I think this has been demonstrated by a few in their reaction to the M9 vs. M8. The price is a major issue for me and I have no particular love for Leica but that should not prevent me from being able to judge the cameras abilities and performance.


Tariq, I'm afraid you misunderstood me here. I didn't look at the photo samples, because I do not intend to buy this camera, not because it is a Leica. I usually would do the same with any brand or model.

I am interested in the concept of the X1 though, and have been wishing we could get a FF option sometime in the future. But I know I cannot justify the price so I just switch my interest somewhere else.

Knowing Leica, I have no doubt the X1 must be special in several ways, and probably the best in its class. I'm sure however that it is not proportionally priced to its quality advantage.



Nov 07, 2009 at 06:05 AM
thrice
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #11 · Leica X1 preview samples gallery


edwardkaraa wrote:
Zeiss lenses can very well be 20-50% more expensive than their competitors, but the last time I was interested in purchasing a Leica, the R50/1.4 cost like 2500$, 5 times the price of its nearest competitor. Of course it is unthinkable that the R50/1.4 could be 5 times better than say the Contax 50/1.4.


Is the Contax 50/1.4 better than the ZF50/1.4? If not then I'd say the R50/1.4 is noticeably superior especially at large apertures, I had both the ZF and the R and there is no contest.

Also I paid about 1900 for my R50/1.4 E60, the ZF cost about 600, so 3 times the price but much better in my humble opinion.

The X1 is going to probably be a great little camera, but quite expensive. The D-Lux 4 is also a lot more than the LX3 - you do pay a bit of a premium just for it being a "Leica". That is an easy thing to criticise but it does give you a little fuzzy feeling and if you're willing to spend the dollars I don't see why anyone else should have anything to say about it.

I also feel a little fuzzy about my Zeiss/Voigtlander lenses... but brass does feel better than aluminium.



Nov 07, 2009 at 06:11 AM
edwardkaraa
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #12 · Leica X1 preview samples gallery


thrice wrote:
Is the Contax 50/1.4 better than the ZF50/1.4? If not then I'd say the R50/1.4 is noticeably superior especially at large apertures, I had both the ZF and the R and there is no contest.


Unfortunately I have to admit, especially after I have tried 2 ZE samples and compared them to my Contax on a Canon 1Ds2, that the Contax is way better at wide apertures. The Contax and Leica 50/1.4 were among the best in their time and I may venture and say, with a slight advantage for the Contax.

Edit: I need to re-affirm that I have nothing against Leica or its clients. I personally do understand the satisfaction one gets from manipulating a mechanically perfect optically superior piece of equipment. I have found in Zeiss the poor man's Leica, so to speak, with often comparable or even better performance, with a more affordable price.



Nov 07, 2009 at 06:16 AM
thrice
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #13 · Leica X1 preview samples gallery


I chose the ZM 25mm biogon because it is just the best lens around the 24/25 focal length. Period. The build quality is great but the focusing is a lot like my voigtlanders and not like my brass leicas. Still a lovely lens, and ever so pretty.

I am less passionate abotu any particular brand than I used to be. I just like certain products rather than certain brands. The X1 doesn't tickle my fancy for my personal use.



Nov 07, 2009 at 06:28 AM
Tariq Gibran
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #14 · Leica X1 preview samples gallery


edwardkaraa wrote:
As I said in my previous post, The X1 doesn't seem to be expensive in Leica's standards. It is only 2 times more expensive than what it normally should sell for. A few years ago, Leica could have asked 5000$ for this camera and get away with it. My Contax T2 that I bought in 1995 for 900$ was way more expensive in comparison.

The M9 seems to be similarly priced. So it seems that Leica understands it cannot command the same prices for products that will become obsolete in 2-3 years time. The lenses however, are another story.



Cost wise, it certainly helps that Leica is not actually making these cameras in Germany any longer (no matter what is printed on the camera). Curiously, the M9 says 'Made in Germany' while the X1 reads 'Leica Germany'. Leica makes the M's in Portugal? and has for a while now. The X1 really should not be that expensive at all given that it has been reported (by those with direct access to Leica personel such as Sean Reid) to be made in Japan by another, unnamed as of yet (but not Panasonic) major player.



Nov 07, 2009 at 09:29 AM
thrice
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #15 · Leica X1 preview samples gallery


Tariq, the M's have their metal components fabricated in Portugal, their electronics made in Germany & Japan, and their Sensors (in the case of digital M's) in USA.

The cameras are shipped partially assembled to Leica's Solms factory, where the camera is partially disassembled again, and then hand assembled by highly trained personel. All calibration and finishing is done by hand in Germany. You can see a video of M9 assembly here: http://www.luminous-landscape.com/videos/m9-video.shtml

I don't think poorly about metal components being fabricated in Portugal, they obviously are of the highest standard. I don't think anyone has ever questioned Leica's build quality?



Nov 07, 2009 at 09:59 AM
Tariq Gibran
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #16 · Leica X1 preview samples gallery


thrice wrote:
Tariq, the M's have their metal components fabricated in Portugal, their electronics made in Germany & Japan, and their Sensors (in the case of digital M's) in USA.

The cameras are shipped partially assembled to Leica's Solms factory, where the camera is partially disassembled again, and then hand assembled by highly trained personel. All calibration and finishing is done by hand in Germany. You can see a video of M9 assembly here: http://www.luminous-landscape.com/videos/m9-video.shtml

I don't think poorly about metal components being fabricated in Portugal, they obviously are of the highest standard. I don't think anyone has ever questioned Leica's build quality?


My response above was only about cost savings that Leica is achieving. Nothing was said about quality. Strange you would bring it up. I have no doubt the quality is there, just as it is for most cameras made in Japan for instance.

Yes, I saw the video long ago. Light assembly of full components made elsewhere, precise calibration and quality control is what it shows being performed by Leica for the M's.



Nov 07, 2009 at 10:11 AM
thrice
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #17 · Leica X1 preview samples gallery


Usually cost savings do imply a degradation in quality. And the important assembly is in Germany where as fabrication is elsewhere, just wanted to clear that up... so it's not so strange.


Nov 07, 2009 at 10:20 AM
Tariq Gibran
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #18 · Leica X1 preview samples gallery


Understood. In the video, it is clear just within the first minute or so that the M's arrive pretty much fully assembled and then, as you say, are partially disassembled. It's not just a matter of the pieces being fabricated elsewhere with ALL finishing done at Leica. All manufacturing and finishing is done before the cameras arrives at Leica Solms, including the painting and fine exterior details except for the body covering and red dot. I think the important part (and many would argue the value attached/associated with the Leica name) is done at Solms, that being the final calibration and quality control. The X1 appears to be a different animal in this regard.

For the record, I would love to have an M9 and those beautiful Leica lenses.



Nov 07, 2009 at 10:46 AM
dave chilvers
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #19 · Leica X1 preview samples gallery


Can I just say! over the years I have had(apart from maybe 12 other Leica M lenses bought new) two Leica M lenses and a Leica top of the range telescope all bought new that had to be returned to Leica for service because of various faults. I also returned a 28-35-50(I think that was the focal lengths) multi focal length lens because I wasn`t happy with the results. One of the lenses had a tight spot when focussing and the telescope was easily beaten by a scope 1/5th the price, they never got that any better and I was told that it was within tolerance (where have we heard that before?) so I sold it. I even went along to Leica UK at Milton Keynes with the tight spot lens and refused to leave till it was replaced.

So, my point is that in those days hand assembly in Germany didn`t cure all the problems. Don`t get me wrong, when right they were superb otherwise I wouldn`t have continued down that road. In those days before all my gear was stolen and I moved to Canon I used Nikon for my SLR gear and I must say that it was fautless.

BTW, anyone buying an M9 must try the 90mm Apo, it really is the ultimate lens.



Nov 07, 2009 at 01:57 PM
snowboarder
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #20 · Leica X1 preview samples gallery




I don't get this at all. The Leica X1 is way ahead of the tiny sensor Ricoh GRIII in terms of IQ. You're deluding yourself with you obvious animosity towards Leica if you think otherwise. I agree than Leica missed a step with the low res LCD, but that has little effect on the resulting quality of the images. Quite frankly, i would have preferred Ricoh to put heir money into a larger sensor rather than a higher res screen. Clearly, the Leica is better built and crafted. I suspect the Leica X1 to have the best, or equal to the
...Show more


Look, you didn't get my Ricoh reference. I just want to point that that small camera uses
an f1.9 prime lens and has a hirez LCD. Leica, which supposed to be the best of the best,
uses an f2.8 lens and has a cr@ppy old LCD, already obsolete a couple of years ago...
Leica hasn't even been released yet...
I don't compare the quality of the images produced by both cameras, I'm simply pointing
to Leica cutting corners and still making you believe they are the best of the best of the best..

I had some high expectations about Leica finally making something right.
I didn't shoot "thousands of frames" with one, but I did try several Leicas a few times
with a high consideration of buying one. I couldn't believe how bad M8 was
after I read all the praises online by several "honest reviewers".
I still considered the new M9, I thought like many - that could be a great small setup:
M9 + the new 21mm lens (I love wides). I didn't realize how awkward it is to shoot
M9 with a 21mm lens (somehow they sold an idea to me that Leica works great with wide
lenses - yeah, if it's not wider than 28mm...)
But when I noticed they put an old cr@ppy lowrez LCD in M9 also, I just couldn't
stop laughing... The best of the best of the best, yeah, right...

And I'm just not getting what's so special in German bear, that drinking a lot of it
makes you more precise and valuable to put together a few parts than the precise
Asian people...




Nov 07, 2009 at 06:26 PM
1       2              4              6       7       end




FM Forums | Leica & Alternative Gear | Join Upload & Sell

1       2              4              6       7       end
    
 

Welcome back
Log in to your account