T or X, which would you choose as a 2nd body?

[woodleica]

So, I've been wanting for some time to have a 2nd lightweight body to complement the M240 that has autofocus capability ( my eyes aren't what they used to be ) , is lightweight, and has a nice set of interchangeable zooms. There are times where I find AF and zooming very useful on travels etc. One additional consideration was that it should work well with M lenses for when I wanted a large aperture prime without having to invest in yet another set of fast lenses.

I was thinking about the Fuji X and even picked up a lens and the M adapter but never ended up getting a camera. I have owned an XE1 in the distant past. But I recall that it's performance with M lenses wasn't that great and while the images and ergonomics were nice, there was something missing for me. So, now with the T, I've seen reports that it works really well with M lenses, and it's native T lenses seem great based on the photos I've seen here from Jono and others and think the interface looks great, despite the few quirks that have been reported. The Fuji X100T is also quite enticing, but I'm worried it's performance with M lenses is probably exactly the same as it was. So if you were in my position, which would you choose? The T or the Fuji?

 

[segedi]

The Fuji X100T is also quite enticing, but I'm worried it's performance with M lenses is probably exactly the same as it was.

If you're looking for an interchangeable lens system, then the X100T with its fixed lens isn't for you. That said, it has ~35mm focal length and appears to facus quickly and accurately from what I've read. The Leica T system is intriguing, but the price...

 

[Paratom]

I am not a fan of the Fuhi X-trans-sensor.
I would choose the T. it has also the advantage you can use your M-lenses on it.
(I have used both cameras for some time)

 

[bradhusick]

I would choose the new DLUX and I did.

 

[Gbealnz]

If you're wanting lens interchangeability, then the T is the only game in town, apart from the X-E1/2 or X-T1.
Why not consider an X-Vario? It has a fixed lens for sure, but the lens is exceptional, and they are very cost effective at the moment.
Gary

 

[woodleica]

If you're looking for an interchangeable lens system, then the X100T with its fixed lens isn't for you. That said, it has ~35mm focal length and appears to facus quickly and accurately from what I've read. The Leica T system is intriguing, but the price...

My bad, I meant the X-T1

 

[woodleica]

I would choose the new DLUX and I did.

The DLux looks very nice, but I do want an interchangeable lens system so it would be the T or a Fuji.

 

[woodleica]

If you're wanting lens interchangeability, then the T is the only game in town, apart from the X-E1/2 or X-T1.
Why not consider an X-Vario? It has a fixed lens for sure, but the lens is exceptional, and they are very cost effective at the moment.
Gary

The X-vario is very nice for sure and has an APS-C size sensor. From what I understand, the T with the 18-56 is very similar with the advantage of interchangeability. I have a sony RX-100 and I miss a larger sensor and interchangeability.

Obviously, I'm leaning towards the T....

 

[woodleica]

I am not a fan of the Fuhi X-trans-sensor.
I would choose the T. it has also the advantage you can use your M-lenses on it.
(I have used both cameras for some time)

Thanks - have you found ( or have ) good examples with M lenses? I think it might have been Sean Reid who did a review and stated the T is better with M lenses than the sony's or Fuji and is only bettered by the Ricoh GXR. I've tried the Sony's and Fuji and gave up earlier.....

 

[DaveS]

You have asked a very pertinent question, and one I have asked myself many times. (and also spend a lot of money on trying to figure out)

I know you stated interchangeable lenses, but what I have found for me is that once I have a another system with interchangeable lenses, is that I am temped, and often succumb, to buying many of the extra lenses for that second system. In the end, I end up building up two (or three) independent systems with overlapping focal lengths.

I have ended up with a M system, Canon EOS full frame, and Olympus EM1/5II set up. Plus specific fixed lens cameras. Fun, but a lot of overlap. (and $$$)

What I found is the X-Vario is a great daytime camera for travel, vacation, party (with a flash), and the M is the go for high resolution, night, and super high quality. (In addition the X-Vario at 28mm and F3.5 with ISO 1600 at night, or indoors, is fabulous.)

So in my humble opinion, the M system, complimented with the X-Vario is a great travel, vacation system, the Xvario is very light, (surprising light) and with 28-70, a very versatile compliment to the M System. Also, if you scale up a RAW file at 70mm to 90mm (Photoshop enlarge 1.3 times approx.) it is hardly distinguishable from a straight file but now at 90mm, not just 70mm. (seriously I mean it)

So you end up with a great combo in my opinion, which also saves you the problem of 'gear creep'. (buying more because it's there)

Lastly two comments on the Leica X system: I also have the X 35mm F1.7 but end up using the X-vario more, and 2: for the X-Vario, I set the exposure to 250 second, F stop to A, and ISO to Auto 1600 max, and everything seems to come together. Sharp (250/second) picture, Any F stop is great on that camera, and up to 1600 ISO in daylight is never an issue, ever.

Seriously, I have already spent the money already, so trying to save you some $$$.

All the best with your decision. Good luck, it is a great big candy store out there....

Dave

 

[aDam007]

X-113 would be the first choice if I were just going with a walk around camera and only had say an S-system (and didn't feel like lugging it)... But my M makes a fine walk around camera. And so does the A7II if you don't care about looks.

 

[JorisV]

The DLux looks very nice, but I do want an interchangeable lens system so it would be the T or a Fuji.

The support of LightRoom for Fuji X-Trans unfortunately still does not seem to convince a lot of people...

If LightRoom is important to your workflow I would probably go T...

If you are OK using Iridient Developer (or Capture One) you will be fine with Fuji...

 

[Godfrey]

If the choice was specifically and only between a Leica T and a Fuji X, I'd take the Leica with no further thought. I'm not interested in Fuji due to the issues with processing the X trans sensor data and, overall, I'm not thrilled about the bodies' controls either. I tried a couple and returned them.

The little I've experimented with the T at the store, I liked it a lot. If the costs of body and lenses doesn't bother you (they're like an APS-C crop on M prices... ;-), it's a nice system that seems to do well with M lenses too.

I went a different way ... My complementary second system is an Olympus Micro-FourThirds. Depending on which body you choose, this is a bit smaller and lighter than the M (E-M1 is about the same, E-PL7 is about 30% less). Both together cost just about what the T body costs. Even the non-pro-grade lenses in the system are good performers (the ultra small and light M.Zuiko 40-150/4-5.6 amazes me with how well it performs for $300 retail) and I get the benefit of very good image stabilization, fast AF, a big lens system to choose from, and a remarkable amount of customization capabilities. An E-PL7 with five premium lenses and super quality EVF will cost less than a Summilux-M 50mm lens. M and R lenses longer than 35mm adapt nicely to Micro-FourThirds too (cropping FoV to effective 2x focal length, of course). I had the FT/mFT system before I bought the M9, added the E-M1 in 2013, added the E-PL7 earlier this year, and have a full range of native lenses for it as well as the M-mount (and F-mount, and R-mount) lens adapter(s). It's a terrific system.

And I added a third way as well ... I bought a Leica X typ 113. I bought it for the superb lens and simplicity of the body, similarity to an film M body. Just one lens but what a wonderful performer: the equivalent of buying a Summilux-M 35mm ASPH with attached body at less than 1/2 the price, with good AF, focus down to 8 inches, excellent optional EVF, movie capture, clean sensitivity up to ISO 6400, etc etc. For me, it's the fantastic modern lens with AF as complement to my 'Lux 35 v2 on the M, and the "I just want a camera with me and I'm not going to bother with changing lenses" nature of the X that has charmed me, along with the simplicity and ease of use.

There are a bazillion ways to cut this and rationalize what you want. As I said up top, for me if the Fuji X or Leica T were the only options, I'd rationalize my way into a Leica T instantly. I just like Leica's designs and notions of camera functionality much more.

G

 

[bradhusick]

If you're considering the X-Vario, then you should consider the D-Lux. I know you want an interchangeable system, but between these two the D-Lux fits in your pocket, and that's pretty handy as a "second" camera. The image quality of the new D-Lux is miles ahead of the D-Lux 6.

 

[Vivek]

Isn't Leica Stellar? Why not recommend the original Panasonic?

 

[monza]

X-Trans processing is a non-issue and has been that way for a long time now. I wouldn't waste time with adapting lenses however, as the Fujinon lenses are superb.

 

[woodleica]

You have asked a very pertinent question, and one I have asked myself many times. (and also spend a lot of money on trying to figure out)

I know you stated interchangeable lenses, but what I have found for me is that once I have a another system with interchangeable lenses, is that I am temped, and often succumb, to buying many of the extra lenses for that second system. In the end, I end up building up two (or three) independent systems with overlapping focal lengths.

I have ended up with a M system, Canon EOS full frame, and Olympus EM1/5II set up. Plus specific fixed lens cameras. Fun, but a lot of overlap. (and $$$)

What I found is the X-Vario is a great daytime camera for travel, vacation, party (with a flash), and the M is the go for high resolution, night, and super high quality. (In addition the X-Vario at 28mm and F3.5 with ISO 1600 at night, or indoors, is fabulous.)

So in my humble opinion, the M system, complimented with the X-Vario is a great travel, vacation system, the Xvario is very light, (surprising light) and with 28-70, a very versatile compliment to the M System. Also, if you scale up a RAW file at 70mm to 90mm (Photoshop enlarge 1.3 times approx.) it is hardly distinguishable from a straight file but now at 90mm, not just 70mm. (seriously I mean it)

So you end up with a great combo in my opinion, which also saves you the problem of 'gear creep'. (buying more because it's there)

Lastly two comments on the Leica X system: I also have the X 35mm F1.7 but end up using the X-vario more, and 2: for the X-Vario, I set the exposure to 250 second, F stop to A, and ISO to Auto 1600 max, and everything seems to come together. Sharp (250/second) picture, Any F stop is great on that camera, and up to 1600 ISO in daylight is never an issue, ever.

Seriously, I have already spent the money already, so trying to save you some $$$.

All the best with your decision. Good luck, it is a great big candy store out there....

Dave

Thanks for your detailed response Dave. It's good to know and I completely understand. I've been here before so I know what you're saying. In my case, I may actually sometimes opt for not taking the M ( like when hiking or long day of waking etc ) but have one or two M lenses with the zooms of the T ( or whichever one I end up choosing ). Hence my thoughts of having an interchangeable system. I have hip issues and can't carry as much weight as I used to.

 

[woodleica]

X-113 would be the first choice if I were just going with a walk around camera and only had say an S-system (and didn't feel like lugging it)... But my M makes a fine walk around camera. And so does the A7II if you don't care about looks.

I think sony makes fine innovative cameras but having owned some Nex's in the past I realized that they are just not for me. And they don't work as well with M lenses.

 

[woodleica]

If the choice was specifically and only between a Leica T and a Fuji X, I'd take the Leica with no further thought. I'm not interested in Fuji due to the issues with processing the X trans sensor data and, overall, I'm not thrilled about the bodies' controls either. I tried a couple and returned them.

The little I've experimented with the T at the store, I liked it a lot. If the costs of body and lenses doesn't bother you (they're like an APS-C crop on M prices... ;-), it's a nice system that seems to do well with M lenses too.

I went a different way ... My complementary second system is an Olympus Micro-FourThirds. Depending on which body you choose, this is a bit smaller and lighter than the M (E-M1 is about the same, E-PL7 is about 30% less). Both together cost just about what the T body costs. Even the non-pro-grade lenses in the system are good performers (the ultra small and light M.Zuiko 40-150/4-5.6 amazes me with how well it performs for $300 retail) and I get the benefit of very good image stabilization, fast AF, a big lens system to choose from, and a remarkable amount of customization capabilities. An E-PL7 with five premium lenses and super quality EVF will cost less than a Summilux-M 50mm lens. M and R lenses longer than 35mm adapt nicely to Micro-FourThirds too (cropping FoV to effective 2x focal length, of course). I had the FT/mFT system before I bought the M9, added the E-M1 in 2013, added the E-PL7 earlier this year, and have a full range of native lenses for it as well as the M-mount (and F-mount, and R-mount) lens adapter(s). It's a terrific system.

And I added a third way as well ... I bought a Leica X typ 113. I bought it for the superb lens and simplicity of the body, similarity to an film M body. Just one lens but what a wonderful performer: the equivalent of buying a Summilux-M 35mm ASPH with attached body at less than 1/2 the price, with good AF, focus down to 8 inches, excellent optional EVF, movie capture, clean sensitivity up to ISO 6400, etc etc. For me, it's the fantastic modern lens with AF as complement to my 'Lux 35 v2 on the M, and the "I just want a camera with me and I'm not going to bother with changing lenses" nature of the X that has charmed me, along with the simplicity and ease of use.

There are a bazillion ways to cut this and rationalize what you want. As I said up top, for me if the Fuji X or Leica T were the only options, I'd rationalize my way into a Leica T instantly. I just like Leica's designs and notions of camera functionality much more.

G

Thanks for the detailed response Godfrey. I am definitely leaning towards the T. As I mentioned I've owned a Fuji before and I think they are very nice, but I found them somehow lacking. It could be the X-Trans sensor, but I just wasn't getting the resolution I was used to.

 

[woodleica]

The support of LightRoom for Fuji X-Trans unfortunately still does not seem to convince a lot of people...

If LightRoom is important to your workflow I would probably go T...

If you are OK using Iridient Developer (or Capture One) you will be fine with Fuji...

Yes, LR is what I use. And I have Fuji files from my earlier X-E1 and I wasn't completely happy. I know there are 3rd party tools and it's probably a matter of time before Adobe catches up.