The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

M9 user take on the X100

glenerrolrd

Workshop Member
Auto Focus speed needs more testing but it feels very acceptable. I don t expect a small street sized camera to match my D3S on AF . Continuous focus seems to be setting expectations beyond the technology .

I set the X100 on manual focus and use the rear AF button . Then I compose exactly like I would with an M9 ....look at the setting (over all scene ) ,decide where the subject needs to be ,move to allow the desired composition....focus on the desired focus point. Wait until the scene develops . take another focus check if the subjects move . So far the X100 works well for me in this mode.

The big difference is that I can get a new AF point quickly while the viewing . You can almost do this with an X1 if you use the green light that you can see with the external finder at eye level.

But as you can gather ...this stays consistent with my RF technique .

Spot metering would be better ..when I think about AF ....mostly want quick accurate placement of the plane of focus verse focus tracking (which is whats required for sports ).

I expect that Sean Reid will have something to say on this as his test of the X100 further develops .
 

Paratom

Well-known member
Auto Focus speed needs more testing but it feels very acceptable. I don t expect a small street sized camera to match my D3S on AF . Continuous focus seems to be setting expectations beyond the technology .

I set the X100 on manual focus and use the rear AF button . Then I compose exactly like I would with an M9 ....look at the setting (over all scene ) ,decide where the subject needs to be ,move to allow the desired composition....focus on the desired focus point. Wait until the scene develops . take another focus check if the subjects move . So far the X100 works well for me in this mode.

The big difference is that I can get a new AF point quickly while the viewing . You can almost do this with an X1 if you use the green light that you can see with the external finder at eye level.

But as you can gather ...this stays consistent with my RF technique .

Spot metering would be better ..when I think about AF ....mostly want quick accurate placement of the plane of focus verse focus tracking (which is whats required for sports ).

I expect that Sean Reid will have something to say on this as his test of the X100 further develops .
I use spot af on the x1 all the time.
 
T

terryc

Guest
Hi Terry

I think there is another major point to consider.

At $1200 the X100 is truly a camera to have with you always. Although not cheap it is many thousands less than an M9 +35 (lux or Cron). So basically a $1K vs $10K rig. My point is that if the X100 were "lifted" you are out $1200 which while not insignificant is not heart stopping either. If the M9 and 35 were similarly lifted it is a game changer. Of course you would have insurance but my experience is that when dealing with expensive gear, it sometimes gets left home unless there is a specific reason to bring it along.

With my K-5, for example, I have a small A&A bag which sits on the floor of the passenger seat. I am thus never without a camera. With the X100, same rule applies but now you are able to put it in the glove compartment and forget it.

Just my thoughts on the matter

Woody
And good thoughts they are Woody, thank you.

However if I based my camera choices on how 'rip-off-able' it looks, etc I think I would not bother with going-out and shooting and would likely not leave the house for fear of getting mugged.

The K5 has a distinct advantage over the X100 - interchangeable and small lenses so I do not agree that the same 'rule applies".

I do believe the X100 is great replacement for the likes of an LX-5, Canon G12, or any variety of other small sensor cameras that people may choose to carry with them during their daily activities.

Not so very long ago on GetDPI there was much interest in m4/3 cameras - because they are small and have 'interchangeable' lenses - with excellent IQ and NOT that expensive - if indeed you are worried about theft. I, again this is me, never found them a replacement for the M9 and feel the same about the X100, complimentary yes, replacement no. I also find the X100 interface useable but overly complex when compared with the likes of the M9.

(I will not argue that the price of the M9 is almost outrageous (6500$) but in my case it is my only 'full frame' camera. I had a bevy of Leica lenses purchase many years ago when prices were somewhat tolerable - so that is not an issue for me.)

The other thing I have noticed is that any commentary even slightly critical of the X100 brings down the wrath of the Internet. It has been given a pass on a few issues that other camera manufactures would have been or have been roasted over.....

I have a Thinktank Urban Disguise 30 bag (has a back pocket that fits the iPad nicely) if what I am using on any given day/occasion doesn't fit in then I don't carry it with me. Since purchasing the X100 it has always been with me so I appreciate your point very much, in my case it replaced a GF1 with the 20mm F1.7. Another friend replaced his Canon G12 with the X100, but says he misses the zoom - he now does his framing with his feet and the scaling function(s) in Lightroom :)

I really like the X100 - full stop.

Best regards, Terry
 

glenerrolrd

Workshop Member
I use spot af on the x1 all the time.
But then you must be looking at the LCD ? and not thru the external finder ? Certainly workable but its nice to frame and focus thru the viewfinder .

Really will depend on the primary subject matter whether the advantage is meaningful.
 

Godfrey

Well-known member
But then you must be looking at the LCD ? and not thru the external finder ? Certainly workable but its nice to frame and focus thru the viewfinder .

Really will depend on the primary subject matter whether the advantage is meaningful.
Roger,

I use an optical viewfinder and spot AF on the GXR all the time. The focus spot is dead center (by default ... I could change it) and well defined, it's easy to lock focus in properly on AF with just a few minutes practice without looking at the LCD at all. With a wide lens in particular, it works beautifully.

I'm sure the same is true of the X1.

Reminds me: I'm going to get the A12 50mm (135EFL) camera module and will need to order a 50mm viewfinder for it. I have the EVF too, but having an optical viewfinder is so nice ... !
 

Paratom

Well-known member
Terry: K5 vs X100 -I agree and disagree-really depends which focal length you need/use when you go "small and compact".
Yes, you can use all different focal length on the K5 but then the X100 is f2.0 and the comparable K5 lens (21 lim) is f3.2. and its still quite a bit smaller.

regarding value of cameras. Personally I have decided to insure my gear-which costs me quite a bit of money but also allows me to use my gear whenever for whatever I want. I dont see much sense to have expensive gear and then leave it at home. (even though I wouldnt bring a Leica bag in an area where I would be afraif regardig rubbery)
 

Paratom

Well-known member
But then you must be looking at the LCD ? and not thru the external finder ? Certainly workable but its nice to frame and focus thru the viewfinder .

Really will depend on the primary subject matter whether the advantage is meaningful.
yeah, display-for this reason and also I find the external viewfinder makes the camera too big
 

jonoslack

Active member
However if I based my camera choices on how 'rip-off-able' it looks, etc I think I would not bother with going-out and shooting and would likely not leave the house for fear of getting mugged.

The K5 has a distinct advantage over the X100 - interchangeable and small lenses so I do not agree that the same 'rule applies".

I do believe the X100 is great replacement for the likes of an LX-5, Canon G12, or any variety of other small sensor cameras that people may choose to carry with them during their daily activities.

Not so very long ago on GetDPI there was much interest in m4/3 cameras - because they are small and have 'interchangeable' lenses - with excellent IQ and NOT that expensive - if indeed you are worried about theft. I, again this is me, never found them a replacement for the M9 and feel the same about the X100, complimentary yes, replacement no. I also find the X100 interface useable but overly complex when compared with the likes of the M9.

(I will not argue that the price of the M9 is almost outrageous (6500$) but in my case it is my only 'full frame' camera. I had a bevy of Leica lenses purchase many years ago when prices were somewhat tolerable - so that is not an issue for me.)

The other thing I have noticed is that any commentary even slightly critical of the X100 brings down the wrath of the Internet. It has been given a pass on a few issues that other camera manufactures would have been or have been roasted over.....


I really like the X100 - full stop.

Best regards, Terry
HI Terry
I think I agree with every word of this - which may, or may not, be something to congratulate yourself upon!

all the best
Jono
 

woodyspedden

New member
HI Terry
I think I agree with every word of this - which may, or may not, be something to congratulate yourself upon!

all the best
Jono
Not that it truly matters (as one's own opinion prevails in matters of this sort) but I am not sure my points were understood.

I will take the X100 or the K-5 plus lenses with me all the time. In fact the K-5 has occupied the front storage space in my Porsche Cayman since the day I bought it (the K-5 that is). The same will be true with the X100 although it will reside in the glove box.

I no longer own a M9 but when I had it the bag I carried the 24 Lux, 35 Lux, 50 Lux and 90 Cron. All in all a very very expensive kit. I was not paranoid about taking the kit but I wanted to be sure that what I needed to shoot was worth taking the risk of robbery or damage.

I now use the S2 system and the same rules apply. I'll take it anywhere so long as the end justifies the risks. For examply I go each year on a journey to one of the canyons of the desert southwest and would not be caught dead without the S2 system.

But each day that I'm out and about here in Colorado there exists many opportunities that may come my way and I want to have a camera with me always. That has justified my investment in the K5. Most images I get on these spur of the moment shots will not be printed large and don't demand the IQ and pixel count of the S2. So horses for courses.

No need to respond. Just wanted to clarify what I really meant in my original post

Woody
 

Godfrey

Well-known member
Reminds me: I'm going to get the A12 50mm (135EFL) camera module and will need to order a 50mm viewfinder for it.
Your math is usually impeccable. :D
Not sure what you meant, Terry.

The Ricoh GXR "A12 50mm f/2.5 Macro" camera module has a 33.5mm focal length lens, which on a 16x24 mm sensor nets the same field of view as a 50mm focal length lens does on 135 format film. Ricoh uses the 135 format "Equivalent Focal Length (that's what '135EFL' means in my post) to list the GXR field of view options, since so far there are three different sensor sizes in the camera modules (A12, S10, P10).

Nobody makes a 33.5 mm focal length optical finder for 16x24 format cameras, but Leica, Cosina, Zeiss and several others have made or make 50mm optical finders for 35mm film format. Since they amount to being the same thing, that's what I'm going to buy.

So ... what did you mean?
 

Godfrey

Well-known member
...

The other thing I have noticed is that any commentary even slightly critical of the X100 brings down the wrath of the Internet. It has been given a pass on a few issues that other camera manufactures would have been or have been roasted over.....

I really like the X100 - full stop.
LOL ... I frankly didn't like the feel of the X100 after playing with Terry's as much as I thought I would, I like the X1 and GXR much more. I found the X100 disappointingly fiddly and cramped in my hands. I like the GXR's feel slightly more than the X1 (the body is slightly taller and easier to grasp securely) and of course it is a more versatile camera with four different camera modules/lenses to work with. And the M Lens module coming up. I'm very glad Keith suggested I look into it.

But I have no problem with people liking the X100. A Leica M9 replacement ... not at all. Not the same kind of camera even. I still want another Leica M someday, but over $6000 for a body and than another $2000 and up for a lens is financially unreachable at the moment and pretty ridiculous in my opinion. That said, I'll probably spend for one some time when I have the dosh to spend or when used M9s (and even M8.2s) reach a more rational price level.

For the price of an M9 plus one lens, I can have the GXR with both A12 camera modules and still have six grand in my pocket for traveling and picture taking. That nets a lot more photography, far as I'm concerned.
 

Terry

New member
Godfrey - it looked as if you were quoting the 50mm lens as being the equivelent field of view of a 135 lens. I haven't seen anyone use the "135EFL" as the terminology anywhere before this.
 

Godfrey

Well-known member
Godfrey - it looked as if you were quoting the 50mm lens as being the equivelent field of view of a 135 lens. I haven't seen anyone use the "135EFL" as the terminology anywhere before this.
Hmm. I think someone else on this forum used it just yesterday or today. Or maybe it was another forum. I thought it a sensible short-hand for "35mm Film camera format focal length equivalent". I dislike the more commonly used "full frame" appellation as it is misleading.
 

dhsimmonds

New member
Than you Roger for the M9/X100 comparison. I have read a lot of critiques about the user interface of the X100 but after just a couple of days, in fact even the first afternoon of shooting with the X100 I was pleasantly surprised at just how sensible the ergonomics of button layout and menu fitted my style of shooting!

I have used Leica's for many years, mainly R's then with DMR back and also the D2 which the X100 reminds me of so much in a funny sort of way.

The JPEG's are just fine straight out of the camera (the D2's and DMR's weren't!) so the choice of the much criticised RAW button is in fact very sensible. If I am in a difficult lighting situation I can press this button and bingo, I have Raw+Jpeg fine! This the first digital camera I have owned that has produced useable JPEG's and a real PP time and memory card saver!

The menu button is often criticised, but just give the whole jog dial a good old shove and it works perfectly every time for me!

My "everyday" cameras are the Sony A900 and A700 with heavy (but excellent IQ) lenses. As mostly a wildlife photographer, the X100 can never replace them but now I can shoot the "wildlife" on the streets with impunity!:ROTFL:
 

bowlachili

New member
Thanks Roger for the user review. Balanced and thoughtful. Good to know that I can explain to my wife that I *NEED* both the Leica M8/M9 AND an
X100, and that neither will replace the other! :D
 

glenerrolrd

Workshop Member
It always depends on what you enjoy shooting and in what type of light you typically encounter. In the context of street shooting in available light ..the x100 has some nice advantages ..certainly not comparable to a M8/9 for all around usage ...but maybe better than most other small cameras for this use.

Fast wide glass, APS-C size sensor ,decent ISO performance at F2 and exceptional viewfinder ..pretty much fit the specification that I was looking for . But for much of my shooting I have to admit its redundant with my M9s . So we will try it for a few months and see.

Lets see if Jono sells his by the end of summer ? LOL
 
Top