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!

Leica M8 (w/ 28mm f/2.8) vs Fuji X100

Erik_A

New member
Has anyone compared their M8 and 28mm f/2.8 Elmarit with a Fuji X100? It seems that the field of view and depth of field would be the same. How is the high ISO noise in the files?
 

Terry

New member
I haven't looked at them side by side but I've had and M8 and I have the X100. X100 is much better at high ISO.
 

leicashot

New member
Had both and about to sell the X100 which is very slow and finicky to operate. Buttons and menu can be slow to operate and sometimes you don't know if the camera fired or not when shooting from the hip. Lens is also quite soft wide open. M8!
 

monza

Active member
The X100 lens is a bit soft close up, but at typical distances, it is anything but! Of course, the 28/2.8 can't shoot anywhere near as close. And f/2 is only something the M8 with 28/2.8 can dream about. The X100 can shoot in the dark at 6400 and f/2. The M8 would need a flash. Lighter, much quieter (yes, you'll never fail to notice the M8 firing) and much easier on the wallet. And what about those UV/IR filters...
 

leicashot

New member
Both cameras have their weaknesses, and while the X100 is the better all-round camera, it's sluggish AF and poor manual focus ability really make it poor for on the fly street photography. I found the GXR to be much better. I missed many shots on the fly with the X100. There is nothing like an M in terms of usability. If you want to anaylse files, then the X100 wins.
 

monza

Active member
I agree it has poor manual focus, but I don't think it's fair to ding the AF (I don't find it sluggish at all) when the comparison M8 is not even capable of it.

The bottom line is what you said: the files are what is important. And the 5-6 year old technology of the M8 just doesn't make sense, unless one already owns one...if not, it's almost 4x the price for that old tech, with a body that is not exactly known for reliability.
 

leicashot

New member
I wasn't saying that the files are more important, I was kinda insinuating the opposite. The experience 'getting the shot' is whats more important TO ME so I prefer the M, because once all is said and done, the better file quality (unless selling to a client) means less TO ME than the fun and experience of capturing the picture - where the M's simplistic and aesthetic advantages really make the process painless and enjoyable, with less fuss over the camera, and more attention to the subject.

For me, the PICTURE is the most important part, not the file, but like I said, TO ME ;-)

Nice argument though, with good points for both great cameras.
 

leicashot

New member
picture and files are two seperate things. if you think so much about the file when shooting the picture is compromised. a good picture and good file are two sepearate things
 

jonoslack

Active member
Hmm - well, an M8 with a 28 elmarit wouldn't be 4 times the price here.

I'm with Leicashot - the X100 is far far better at high ISO, but at base ISO there is no comparison.

But it's the useability that's the thing - the X100 is fiddly, and it's not always clear what it's trying to do - manual focus really is a non starter, and the AF is odd unless you use the EVF.

The Leica is old fashioned and lacking in features . . . . and it's lovely and transparent to use.

Personally I wouldn't have either . . . but if it was one of them, then it'd be the M8 every time.
 

fotografz

Well-known member
File quality is in the eye of the beholder isn't it?

Personally I do not like the look of the X100 files at any ISO ... and thankfully, early adopters saved me from spending the money to find that out first hand.

If I ever came across a really cheap M8 I'd be tempted to snag it because it is simple and straightforward to use, and I'd employ it strictly for gritty B&W street and candid work which it was great at IMHO.

However, these are opinions of a die-hard rangefinder user, heavily biased to the Leica look to the exclusion of almost any other 35mm or APSc camera made ;)

-Marc
 

Erik_A

New member
Zack Arias just posted this excellent review of the Fujifilm x100 :

http://zackarias.com/for-photographe...i-x100-review/

I am impressed, although I think that, for my small camera, I will stick with my Olympus GF1 and 20mm 1.7 because I shoot photos of my kids at close (less than 3') range and wide open at f1.7 quite often, and the GF1 just works very well for this.
 

leicashot

New member
Olympus make a GF1??? ;-)

The X100 is a nice camera, but for street, someone used to a Leica M, I found it to be very slow. I missed many shots cause it just wouldn't fire, or I couldn't tell if it fired. Sometimes quiet, is TOO quiet so be careful what you wish for.

Using the X100 made me miss my M9 and the GXR.
 

Paratom

Well-known member
Has anyone compared their M8 and 28mm f/2.8 Elmarit with a Fuji X100? It seems that the field of view and depth of field would be the same. How is the high ISO noise in the files?
I dont have the x100 but had the M8 and have had several cameras which are siad to be very good at high ISO (D700, K5).
For my taste I am pretty sure that up and including ISO 640 I would definatly prefer the IQ from the M8.
Going higher ISO I am sure the X100 wins, plus its one stop faster than the 28 Elmarit (If you go Leica I would see if you cant get an 28mm f2.0 lens from Leica or CV).

Besides this I see a huge advantage for the M8 in the ability to change lenses. So you can use longer lenses than 35mm FOV, and faster lenses with f1.4 or f1.2 (35/1.2 CV for example, or Leica 35 or 50 f1.4)
And then its the different user interface.
 

edftwin

Member
M8 with VC 28 F/2 definitely beats X100 at iso below 640 but i found out that ISO 1250 and even 2500 are quite usable as well with a bit of noise reduction applied in LR.

However, x100 can focus closer but with the need of changing the mode into macro and the MFD in normal mode is about 0.8m, that's 0.1m further than M8 with 28 F2 or F2.8.
 
Top