X1 samples

[Amin]

I agree with most of you. These samples don't look that great. However, remember that this camera is considerably smaller than the smallest Micro Four Thirds camera-lens combination, so for some folks its only competition will be DP2.

 

[cam]

I agree with most of you. These samples don't look that great. However, remember that this camera is considerably smaller than the smallest Micro Four Thirds camera-lens combination, so for some folks its only competition will be DP2.

or, possibly, the new Ricoh, if it stays within the GX size.

 

[kevinparis]

Amin

having seen/held E-P1, GF1 and X1 - i dispute your "considerably smaller" comment. X1 is in the same ball park dimension wise as the micro 4/3 cameras. None of them are as pocketable as something like a Canon G9 or indeed a GRD.

K

 

[Amin]

Amin

having seen/held E-P1, GF1 and X1 - i dispute your "considerably smaller" comment.

Well, there's not much point in my disputing something so subjective. I have not held an X1, but it's DP-sized, right? To me, a DP2 is considerably smaller than an E-P1. Your mileage varies.

 

[nei1]

this camera is considerably smaller than the smallest Micro Four Thirds camera-lens combination, so for some folks its only competition will be DP2.

I looked back at the dp2 samples after looking at the x1 photos and the difference is quite striking.I also looked at the eos 7 and the difference is ,obviously,even more striking;.....at the moment this unfortunatly looks like an expensive toy,....... leica taking the pisss.
Im wondering just what is inside digital cameras,do their circuit boards actually fill up their boxes?Be interesting to see just what is inside the x1 and what the components cost,I mean if the lens is no good?
But then maybe Im wrong,,perhaps when it has its "profile"sorted for C5 or K9 all will be well,software to the rescue.......hurah.......hurrraaahhhhhhh!!!!!!

 

[monza]

E-P2 : 121mm (W) x 70mm (H) x 36mm (D) (excluding protrusions)
4.7" x 2.7" x 1.4"

X1: 124 x 60 x 32 mm (4.9 x 2.4 x 1.3 in)

 

[Amin]

(excluding protrusions)

Don't forget that protrusion called the lens .

 

[monza]

That was copied from dpreview. Which lens?

 

[Amin]

That was copied from dpreview. Which lens?

As measured by DPR, that E-P2 cannot be used to make pictures. Ie, no lens .

 

[kevinparis]

ok

quick and dirty photoshop job... x1 and e-p1 squeezed into their published dimensions.... x1 is smaller in the body... mainly in height

neither include the lens in their calculations... used the pancake on the E-p1 as it is the focal length/aperture equivalent.

K

 

[Amin]

Looks considerably smaller to me, unless of course one pockets the X1 with the lens extended .

 

[kevinparis]

amin...

only the first two sections of the x1 lens retract...it doesn't all retract into the body... so depthwise its pretty much the same as the e-p1.

K

 

[ddk]

Re: Carsten..

I think more than a few here have the "talent" and ability to look at a group of images and realize there are a few issues with them. I was not impressed by those images either, yet you can find people gushing over them in this and other forums. Different strokes I suppose.

What is even more bothersome is that Leica allowed DPReview to post the first images from an X1 production model. What's wrong with that picture? (Pardon the pun)... Why did Leica not have a talented, or at least mediocre, photographer (surely they know a few) create an impressive image gallery on Leica's own X1 site instead of those random snapshots on DPReview?? :wtf:

You already answered your own question Jim, dpr is gusher central for Leica!

From what I have seen thus far, the X1 photos could have been taken by just about any sub $800 point and shoot.. and this is making the GF1 look better and better all the time.. on performance, versatility and price.

I've not ruled out the X1 but I really expected the production model to produce amazing images and thus far I am far from amazed by anything I have seen... and I have to wonder about the camera's potential.

Amazing images are made by people and not cameras, and they can be deceiving. Personally, I find simple and basic images like those posted on dpr to tell me more about the CAMERA's character than super shots from a top photographer controlling everything in the scene for that advertising image.

 

[Amin]

amin...

only the first two sections of the x1 lens retract...it doesn't all retract into the body... so depthwise its pretty much the same as the e-p1.

K

Here's my quick rendition:

Keeping in mind the difference in height and weight, I'm pretty sure that the difference will be significant from my perspective. As I mentioned, I've handled the DP2 and E-P1 side by side, and the size difference was considerable to me.

 

[Brian Mosley]

Well, I know that dpreview has a soft spot for Leica (as do I)... they even changed their site logo to a Leica red dot a little while ago.

Note that Leica didn't pay for that. :angel:

Cheers

Brian

 

[Brian Mosley]

Amin, I don't think the size is as big a factor as ergonomics (certainly not to me). People love the Leica controls... I just don't think I could cope with that lens - too slow, too fragile looking, too limited.

Cheers

Brian

 

[kevinparis]

Amin

Hope you will be happy with the x1... but your original assertion that it is 'considerably smaller' in my opinion doesn't really hold up. Yes the x1 may be slightly smaller in some dimensions... but overall the package is about the same - certainly any difference in size is not enough to justify choosing one over the other.

K

 

[kevinparis]

Brian

Agree about the ergonomics... I like the simplicity of the x1 compared to the e-p1

K

 

[Amin]

Amin

Hope you will be happy with the x1...

Kevin, I've no plans to buy the X1

... but your original assertion that it is 'considerably smaller' in my opinion doesn't really hold up.

I think you're being silly. "Considerably" isn't a scientific term. There is no percentage or objective quantification for what is "considerable". I have handled the DP2, which is similar in size and form to the X1, and I have handled the E-P1 with 17mm pancake. To me, the difference in size is considerable. It is not enough of a difference for me to choose the X1, but I believe there is enough of a difference there to be a major factor for some people despite the fact that it isn't a big difference to you.

 

[Jim Radcliffe]

Re: Carsten..

You already answered your own question Jim, dpr is gusher central for Leica!

Amazing images are made by people and not cameras, and they can be deceiving. Personally, I find simple and basic images like those posted on dpr to tell me more about the CAMERA's character than super shots from a top photographer controlling everything in the scene for that advertising image.

Actually there seemed to be more at DPReview who feel the same way I do about the samples. The gushers were more prominent in the Rangefinder Forum, LUF and some other boards I visit.

Let's face it.. it will be a coin toss. For the Leica FanBoys it will be as expected. For the rest of us it will be a bit more personal and critical based on what and how we shoot and what we need to shoot in our own style and fashion.

We're looking at this in two different ways.. I am looking at the images in a technical sense, not artistic, subject, emotion, etc.. A Holga is capbale of producing an amazing image... but at $2,000 for the X1 I expected to see images that were, for lack of a better descriptor, "Leica Like" in appearance. I did not see that, instead I saw run of the mill snaps that could have been made with almost any high end P&S.

Now please don't push the "Leica Like" button.. you know what that means as well as I do. I should not need to clarify that even if I could.