Site Sponsors
Results 1 to 39 of 39

Thread: M9 user take on the X100

  1. #1
    Workshop Member glenerrolrd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Jupiter FL/Atlanta GA
    Posts
    2,121
    Post Thanks / Like

    M9 user take on the X100

    My bias is always toward the Leica M bodies and for street shooting they still set the standard. But the X100 on paper has a few things that the M9 doesn t and since you can t really lose on buying the camera ..I bought one . Took it to NYC for some comparison shooting with the M9s.

    Of course I base everything on the M9 s as a starting point because its a real life relevant standard . I feel I could use either camera in most every situation on the street (which I can t say even for small DSLR like a Nikon D7000).

    The one big negative is the awful user interface ..probably missed a dozen shots do to things like displaying the play back in the viewfinder . The software team should be abandoned at sea . But this will get better as I become more familiar with the options.

    The positives are much better than expected . The viewfinder options put the X1 to shame . With optical I use manual focus with the rear button set for AF ...this is perfect . I can prefocus on a spot and let the scene develop. (You don t really use continuous focus on a moving subject and expect to have anything but a centered image? ). The EVF is brighter than real life and allows for an enlarged view . Manual focus is easy to fine tune and no recomposition required . The rear LCD allows for viewing on shots from your knee level or putting the camera overhead (for crowd views) .

    The high ISO is superb almost like a D3 file(up to 1600) . ISO 1600 only suffers a loss in DR ...noise isn t an issue . It appears to be a full EV better than the M9 where ISO 1600 requires a “never underexpose “ mentality. It also doesn t hurt that metering and auto WB seemed dead on even under mixed lighting. Of course I can use the M9 with a 1.4 or even the Noctilux to even things up on light gathering. But consider that a APS-C size sensor has more DOF and the chances of getting a sharp image at night are better with the X100.

    SILENT...can t get much better than this for shooting inside and this comes from a guy that shot his daughters wedding from the front row with his iPhone and never got caught .

    IQ is excellent ... not an M9 level but closer to the D3 and processing makes a huge difference. I am sure others can comment but an M9 file in LR is near perfect with the standard presets and profiles. I normally work curves bit ,add maybe 20 clarity and use mild sharpening . The X100 files are more like .NEF files . Will accept and benefit from stronger presets ... about the same curve settings but clarity can go above 50,vibrancy 17,saturation 15 and stronger sharpening . For my use comparing the best presets I can come up with is the only relevant comparison. Frankly I am surprised at how good the x100 files look at ISO1600. At this is shooting at F2 .

    So for Street Shooting the X100 seems to bring some real advances and in certain situations may even be preferable to the M9 .

  2. #2
    Super Moderator Cindy Flood's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Wisconsin
    Posts
    3,361
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    118

    Re: M9 user take on the X100

    Roger,
    This is an excellent analysis.
    One thing that stands out to me when I compare X100 to M9 is the size. I could never carry around the M9 with a fast lens in my purse because of weight and size. The X100 fits in a little A+A Rena bag. I keep it in my purse and it goes everywhere with me.

  3. #3
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    jonoslack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    East Anglia & Cornwall (UK)
    Posts
    11,524
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: M9 user take on the X100

    Quote Originally Posted by Cindy Flood View Post
    Roger,
    This is an excellent analysis.
    Quite agree - thanks Roger - good assesment, it makes me consider a similar comparison for Nature shooting!

    Quote Originally Posted by Cindy Flood View Post
    One thing that stands out to me when I compare X100 to M9 is the size. I could never carry around the M9 with a fast lens in my purse because of weight and size. The X100 fits in a little A+A Rena bag. I keep it in my purse and it goes everywhere with me.
    Interesting point about size Cindy - and it brings up something which Terry pointed out to me - which is that boys and girls have different size references.

    Basically, for you, the crucial issue is whether it'll fit in your purse/handbag comfortably, because you always have it with you. For men it's whether it'll fit in you pocket - and neither will fit in a summer pocket, but the X100 would fit in a coat pocket okay.

    My X100 arrived last night - what fun it is, and less of a fiddle than I'd expected, but I need more time to really get to grips with it.

    all the best

    Just this guy you know

  4. #4
    Workshop Member glenerrolrd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Jupiter FL/Atlanta GA
    Posts
    2,121
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: M9 user take on the X100

    You can t argue with having a camera with you always. But its the ISO1600 performance that makes the difference for me and also its a $1200 camera verse a $12,000 camera (M9+35lux )which makes taking it anywhere a little less of a concern.

  5. #5
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    jonoslack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    East Anglia & Cornwall (UK)
    Posts
    11,524
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: M9 user take on the X100

    Quote Originally Posted by glenerrolrd View Post
    You can t argue with having a camera with you always. But its the ISO1600 performance that makes the difference for me and also its a $1200 camera verse a $12,000 camera (M9+35lux )which makes taking it anywhere a little less of a concern.
    Hi Roger
    I agree that the high ISO is better . . . . but I'm not so certain that it would be if you reduced the M9 files to 12mp (always dangerous comparing cameras with different resolutions at 100%).

    Much as I really like shooting with the camera, for me, I'm pretty sure that the lack off AA filter and the better resolution means I'll be back with the M9 pretty sharpish. Still, it's great fun.

    Just this guy you know

  6. #6
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    38
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: M9 user take on the X100

    How does cropping affect signal-to-noise ratio or dynamic range?

    Did you mean a hypothetical M9 sensor with less, but larger pixels? This could make a difference.

    The inherent resolution of the M9 does not decrease as the ISO increases. The uncertainty (noise) in the RAW data increases, and uncertainty adversely affects all aspects of image quality.

    Anyway I am certain at ISO 1600 the X100 sensor has a better signal-to-noise ratio in it's RAW files than the M9. So what? Cameras have advantages and disadvantages. The M9 has more advantages than disadvantages. So does the X100. They are just different advantages and disadvantages.

    I own a X100. I will never own a M9 under any circumstances. The M9 must have higher resolution.. period. As far as inherent resolution goes, it is certainly a better camera than the X100.

  7. #7
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    jonoslack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    East Anglia & Cornwall (UK)
    Posts
    11,524
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: M9 user take on the X100

    Quote Originally Posted by willie_901 View Post
    How does cropping affect signal-to-noise ratio or dynamic range?

    Did you mean a hypothetical M9 sensor with less, but larger pixels? This could make a difference.
    .
    Of course, Cropping doesn't affect signal to noise ratio or dynamic range - but I wasn't talking about cropping, I was talking about downsizing the image.

    All the best

    Just this guy you know

  8. #8
    terryc
    Guest

    Re: M9 user take on the X100

    Enjoyed reading the original post...thank you for that.

    I have an X100 and an M9. My (overly simple) take is...

    Leica M9 = Simplicity

    Fujifilm X100 = Complexity

    The X100 is fun to shoot with no doubt about that but then so is the M9 with a 35mm lens of most any vintage. In my humble opinion two different experiences - two very different cameras.

    Best regards, Terry C.

  9. #9
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Godfrey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Near San Jose, California
    Posts
    6,624
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: M9 user take on the X100

    Quote Originally Posted by Cindy Flood View Post
    Roger,
    This is an excellent analysis.
    One thing that stands out to me when I compare X100 to M9 is the size. I could never carry around the M9 with a fast lens in my purse because of weight and size. The X100 fits in a little A+A Rena bag. I keep it in my purse and it goes everywhere with me.
    Good personal review, I agree.

    The X100 (and the GXR as they are almost identical in size/weight) are cameras I most normally will wear on the neckstrap.. They are light and don't get in the way sitting on my chest, and are always handy there. When nit around my neck, they drop into my smallest bags without a thought (for this trip, the Terraclime 100 has been my constant companion, filled with iPad, notebooks, wallet, camera and phone)..

  10. #10
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Terry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    6,955
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1145

    Re: M9 user take on the X100

    Roger,
    You can turn off the image review.

  11. #11
    Workshop Member glenerrolrd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Jupiter FL/Atlanta GA
    Posts
    2,121
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: M9 user take on the X100

    Jono

    Am I missing something . I evaluate the IQ with both images at the same size(not 100% pixel view) on my MacBook so the M9 file gets full credit for the 18 verse 12 mps. I also look just as much as how the higher ISO affects DR and color saturation . I think its easy to see where the M9 starts to loose it ...around 800 . After 800 any underexposed area starts to fall apart . The color saturation and tone separation starts to weaken.

    Doesn t mean that you can t squeeze the image into a tighter DR its just more difficult . I find for example at night I set the exposure at + 0.7 just to be sure I don t underexpose .

    X100 doesn t seem to have much of a AA filter and generates moire (my poor focusing skills normally take care of it). But I find that pulling up the clarity slider makes the most difference. One of the LR gurus told me this winter that up to 50% clarity works like the unsharp mask but after 50% some of the deconvolution logic kicks in . (Have no idea if this is right but I know this is what he said ). I never use more than 20 on an M9 file.

    The x100 will never replace my M9 s but night shooting is a real challenge . The difficulty with street shooting at night is that you still need 1/125 really 1/250 to stop subject movement and great eyes to focus quickly and accurately at f1.4 .


    Quote Originally Posted by jonoslack View Post
    Hi Roger
    I agree that the high ISO is better . . . . but I'm not so certain that it would be if you reduced the M9 files to 12mp (always dangerous comparing cameras with different resolutions at 100%).

    Much as I really like shooting with the camera, for me, I'm pretty sure that the lack off AA filter and the better resolution means I'll be back with the M9 pretty sharpish. Still, it's great fun.

  12. #12
    Member Armanius's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Houston, Texas, USA
    Posts
    210
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    6

    Re: M9 user take on the X100

    Great thread! As a M9 owner and future X100 owner (tomorrow hopefully), I really enjoyed reading the discussion!
    Armanius
    My Flickr

  13. #13
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    jonoslack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    East Anglia & Cornwall (UK)
    Posts
    11,524
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: M9 user take on the X100

    Quote Originally Posted by glenerrolrd View Post
    Jono

    Am I missing something . I evaluate the IQ with both images at the same size(not 100% pixel view) on my MacBook so the M9 file gets full credit for the 18 verse 12 mps. I also look just as much as how the higher ISO affects DR and color saturation . I think its easy to see where the M9 starts to loose it ...around 800 . After 800 any underexposed area starts to fall apart . The color saturation and tone separation starts to weaken.
    Well I've only had the X100 for 24 hours, and haven't shot at night, but I agree that's a weakness with the m9. Which I always shoot for black and White at night.

    Just this guy you know

  14. #14
    Member Armanius's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Houston, Texas, USA
    Posts
    210
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    6

    Re: M9 user take on the X100

    Quote Originally Posted by jonoslack View Post
    Well I've only had the X100 for 24 hours, and haven't shot at night, but I agree that's a weakness with the m9. Which I always shoot for black and White at night.
    Do you shoot JPG then when using B&W at night with the M9?
    Armanius
    My Flickr

  15. #15
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    New York, NY
    Posts
    128
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    29

    Re: M9 user take on the X100

    This is an interesting thread. I am reserving judgment on IQ comparisons as I have only had the X100 for about a week so it is not fair.

    I did want to say, though, that I have had a different experience on night shooting with the M9. I find the M9 to be the only camera that I have ever had that I can reliably shoot at night.

    The main issue with the other cameras I've used (a lot of the popular full-frame, APS or m43 CMOS cameras of the last 2-3 years) is that night pictures taken with them are sometimes (or often) affected by halos or other distortions around the streetlights or other light sources. This has never happened with my M9. Even when I take the M lenses off and mount on other bodies and shoot the exact same scene, I get halos sometimes. Maybe this just bothers me more than most people.

    Second, although there is less latitude for correcting mis-exposed shots, when you get the exposure right things actually look phenomenal at night at 640 and still excellent at 1250. Part of it I think is that the sharpness and "pop" at f2 is so different than many other camera/lens combos at anything approaching f2, and it shows. Of course, I'd rather the M9 be 2-3 stops better and I hope they improve.

    Finally, I find manual focusing the M9 at night so much faster and more reliable than dealing with autofocus. Of course, I understand some people prefer autofocus.

    Anyway, I'm having fun with the X100. I agree with Roger's points about how nice the silent shutter is, and how much the files benefit from post-processing. And I agree that for all the fuss, the viewfinder's actually great and a major benefit over, e.g., the X1. But the main selling point for me so far is the fact that despite the good IQ the camera feels a bit like a toy (in the best sense--i.e. fun, not shoddy) so you don't expect too much or put any pressure on yourself--which is often when you take your best shots.
    Last edited by MPK2010; 11th May 2011 at 17:28.

  16. #16
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Fort Collins, Colorado
    Posts
    2,072
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: M9 user take on the X100

    Quote Originally Posted by terryc View Post
    Enjoyed reading the original post...thank you for that.

    I have an X100 and an M9. My (overly simple) take is...

    Leica M9 = Simplicity

    Fujifilm X100 = Complexity

    The X100 is fun to shoot with no doubt about that but then so is the M9 with a 35mm lens of most any vintage. In my humble opinion two different experiences - two very different cameras.

    Best regards, Terry C.
    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

  17. #17
    Senior Member barjohn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    San Clemente, CA
    Posts
    930
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    171

    Re: M9 user take on the X100

    I know that when I had the M8 and several lenses in the bag, it was a conscious decision whether to bring it or not. If it wasn't an outing for photography but instead a more social event, I had to think about whether I wanted to leave $9 or $10K sitting around while we got up and danced or had a fun conversation where the camera bag was left sitting on the table or floor. Of course on the floor I worried about a waiter or friend accidentally stepping on it. My other half kept saying; "do you have to bring that?" Even with insurance it got left at home. With the X100 and its dead silent shutter, no complaints and I bring it along.
    V/r John

  18. #18
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    3,801
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: M9 user take on the X100

    I too could carry the X100 all day and not feel it. An M9 with a 35/2 or lux is another matter. And yes, I'd be 10x as concerned about its safety.

    If you haven't seen the dpreview comparison of ISOs, check this out:


  19. #19
    Workshop Member glenerrolrd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Jupiter FL/Atlanta GA
    Posts
    2,121
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: M9 user take on the X100

    Street Shooting is a good test of a cameras “available light “ suitability. If people are involved then ..good luck if you shoot slower than 1/125 . DOF is always a challenge because of the need for absolute precise focus ..but also sometimes you need the DOF to get enough of the subjects sharp. So this places a high demand on better ISO performance . My tests show that its often about ISO 1600 where the ambient light seems to match the evening illumination . Once all ambient light is gone ...good luck getting any percentage of images that meet the standard .

    Here are three examples of where I shot over the weekend in NYC. Brooklyn Bridge at Sunset 7-8PM. Times Square 7-8PM . Grand Central Station 8-9AM. All three real tests for available light street shooting.

    As the above tests(MONZA s post) show many of the current DSLR bodies have excellent higher ISO capabilities ..but none of the small bodies seem to compete . No need to be more precise ...I ve looked at enough M9 files to know my limits and above ISO800 ..I have no exposure latitude and shooting wide open on anything that can move is iffy . So as much as I prefer the M9 for anything on the street ...it falls short in higher ISO performance ....800 is reliable and 1600 I have to assume that more images will have technical issues . And at 3200 why bother ?

    The X100 looks very good at 1600 and considering its other attributes ..it appears we finally have a small high quality pocket size camera with excellent IQ at higher ISO levels . Not sure I see D3 or even D7000 performance but then I haven t used it that much (and the DSLR just can t go everywhere and be effective) .

    As I noted my observations are completely slanted toward street shooting with an M9 as a point of reference .

  20. #20
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    3,240
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: M9 user take on the X100

    This is an interesting thread.

    Owning the M9 and x1 I have tried to resist the x100 so far.
    My argument allways has been that the M9 will have better IQ and that the x1 is smaller while achieve comparable IQ. By the way I am also one of those who has allways seen the x1 as a great camera, for me its a digital ROllei 35 without OVF but with AF. I particuallary like the spot AF of the x1 which allows to focus where Iwant to focus (on an eye for example) - and while slow it focuses pretty damn accurate (I wish my K5 could do that).

    Now what makes me interested in the x100 is the hybrid/OVF, and the f2 lens.

    I am a little concerned if people report the x100 to have a complex user interface. Because simple user interface is important to me and I allready find the EP2 and other m4/3 cameras too complex with all the menues and functions.

    What I wondered and here comes my question: Anybody here have compared the gxr to the x100?
    How would they compare regarding IQ, AF speed, user interface? (Besides the GXR not having an OVF)?
    While 35mm lens/FOV of the x100 is great 28 + 50 might fit my needs even better.

    And would people here agree that there is quite an IQ difference in DR and color between those dx cameras and m4/3 or would you say theopposite?

  21. #21
    Workshop Member glenerrolrd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Jupiter FL/Atlanta GA
    Posts
    2,121
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: M9 user take on the X100

    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 .

  22. #22
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    3,240
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: M9 user take on the X100

    Quote Originally Posted by glenerrolrd View Post
    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.

  23. #23
    terryc
    Guest

    Re: M9 user take on the X100

    Quote Originally Posted by woodyspedden View Post
    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

  24. #24
    Workshop Member glenerrolrd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Jupiter FL/Atlanta GA
    Posts
    2,121
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: M9 user take on the X100

    Quote Originally Posted by t_streng View Post
    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.

  25. #25
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Godfrey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Near San Jose, California
    Posts
    6,624
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: M9 user take on the X100

    Quote Originally Posted by glenerrolrd View Post
    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 ... !

  26. #26
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    3,240
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: M9 user take on the X100

    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)

  27. #27
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    3,240
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: M9 user take on the X100

    Quote Originally Posted by glenerrolrd View Post
    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

  28. #28
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Terry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    6,955
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1145

    Re: M9 user take on the X100

    Quote Originally Posted by Godfrey View Post
    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.

  29. #29
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    jonoslack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    East Anglia & Cornwall (UK)
    Posts
    11,524
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: M9 user take on the X100

    Quote Originally Posted by terryc View Post
    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

    Just this guy you know

  30. #30
    terryc
    Guest

    Re: M9 user take on the X100

    Quote Originally Posted by jonoslack View Post
    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
    Thanks Jono.

  31. #31
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Fort Collins, Colorado
    Posts
    2,072
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: M9 user take on the X100

    Quote Originally Posted by jonoslack View Post
    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

  32. #32
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Godfrey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Near San Jose, California
    Posts
    6,624
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: M9 user take on the X100

    Quote Originally Posted by TEBnewyork View Post
    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.
    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?

  33. #33
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Godfrey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Near San Jose, California
    Posts
    6,624
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: M9 user take on the X100

    Quote Originally Posted by terryc View Post
    ...

    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.

  34. #34
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    jonoslack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    East Anglia & Cornwall (UK)
    Posts
    11,524
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: M9 user take on the X100

    Quote Originally Posted by Godfrey View Post
    But I have no problem with people liking the X100. A Leica M9 replacement ... not at all. Not the same kind of camera even.
    Quite agree - funny that!

    Just this guy you know

  35. #35
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Terry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    6,955
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1145

    Re: M9 user take on the X100

    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.

  36. #36
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Godfrey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Near San Jose, California
    Posts
    6,624
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: M9 user take on the X100

    Quote Originally Posted by TEBnewyork View Post
    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.

  37. #37
    Senior Member dhsimmonds's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Hampshire, UK
    Posts
    828
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    20

    Re: M9 user take on the X100

    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!
    Cheers, Dave
    www.simmondsphotography.com

  38. #38
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Brooklyn!, NYC
    Posts
    30
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: M9 user take on the X100

    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!

  39. #39
    Workshop Member glenerrolrd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Jupiter FL/Atlanta GA
    Posts
    2,121
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: M9 user take on the X100

    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

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •