X100 v M9

[dhsimmonds]

Do not use this link if you own a Leica M9!!

http://snapsort.com/compare/Fujifilm_FinePix_X100-vs-Leica_M9

Data for both cameras provided by DXO.

Which camera would you rather have:
a) If given to you?
b) If you had to save for and buy either camera?

 

[OlliL]

Best "comparison" ever made

 

[jonoslack]

Do not use this link if you own a Leica M9!!

http://snapsort.com/compare/Fujifilm_FinePix_X100-vs-Leica_M9

Data for both cameras provided by DXO.

Which camera would you rather have:
a) If given to you?
b) If you had to save for and buy either camera?

HI Dave
interesting that the advantages of the M9 are that it's:

More than 20% smaller
More than 30% thinner

Hmmm

The advantages of the X1 are all fine except the image quality one - even DxO will say that you can't compare scores from different sensor sizes . . . but if you do, then the K5/D7000 knocks both into a cocked hat.

It also doesn't mention that you can't do manual focus with the X100 in OVF mode. . .

Hey - why am I doing this! - we all know that it's a ludicrous comparison. It's like doing a comparison between a VW Tuareg and an Alpha Guilietta - they're just different.

 

[Paratom]

This comparison is totally useless IMO.

 

[jonoslack]

This comparison is totally useless IMO.

Quite funny though!

 

[glenerrolrd]

Since I was shooting both a few minutes ago to check the calibration of my M9 s ...and I just looked at the images ...it is clear that the x100 has some nice advantages in its design and price.

Too bad their comparison test didn t mention most of them . There were plenty of competent small format and 4/3 versions before the x100. What sets it apart are the full APS-C sized sensor, the optical viewfinder and the overall high quality of the camera and its lens.

If you have developed a shooting rhythm based on Leica M s , the x100 is very nice .

Other than high ISO performance (which they said was close?) it doesn t best the M in anyway . Its just that not everyone needs a Leica M system and the X100 is a very decent camera if your main system is say MF .

 

[dhsimmonds]

Now Jono and Roger, I did warn you not to click the link!!!:ROTFL:

Imagine the posts if this was posted at LUF!

 

[jonoslack]

Now Jono and Roger, I did warn you not to click the link!!!:ROTFL:

Imagine the posts if this was posted at LUF!

Oh! I thought we behaved rather well

. . . .did he say the X100 only had a 1.4 stop high ISO advantage over the M9 :bugeyes:

I enjoyed it, but anyone who is using a site like that to decide whether to buy an X100 or an M9 . . . shouldn't buy either of them!

Go on . . . post it at LUF . . . I dare you :ROTFL:

 

[Arjuna]

It has a couple of interesting points that were new to me:

- CMOS-family sensors often produce better quality images?
- 22.9 bits vs 22.5 bits somehow translates to Distinguishes more than 30% more colors?
- the Fuji has a Pentamirror! no-one else, including Fuji, seems to have noticed that.

 

[jonoslack]

It has a couple of interesting points that were new to me:

- CMOS-family sensors often produce better quality images?
- 22.9 bits vs 22.5 bits somehow translates to Distinguishes more than 30% more colors?
- the Fuji has a Pentamirror! no-one else, including Fuji, seems to have noticed that.

Just shows what an innovative and exciting website we've been directed to.

 

[willie_901]

Do not use this link if you own a Leica M9!!
....

Which camera would you rather have:
a) If given to you?
b) If you had to save for and buy either camera?

For a): the M9. Then I could sell it, buy a X100 and take an extended trip to make photographs and enjoy life.

For b): The X100


I own a X100. I will never own a M9. The M9 is a much better camera than the X100.

 

[a_summarita]

have used both and i have to say this is a great tongue in cheek comparison with some valid points

although Leica M series will always +1 for me for that one reason - the ability to use Leica M lenses.

The bokeh, sharpness, 3D pop - mamameia!

 

[dhsimmonds]

I enjoyed it, but anyone who is using a site like that to decide whether to buy an X100 or an M9 . . . shouldn't buy either of them!

Go on . . . post it at LUF . . . I dare you :ROTFL:

I couldn't be the cause of WW3, all that death and destruction....whatever are you asking of me! :angel:

Anyone visiting a website with ".......rumours" as it's name should know what to expect! Now one with ........."leaks" might be a bit different! :wtf:

Now where's the one comparing x100 v X1...............! oke:

 

[nugat]

It has a couple of interesting points that were new to me:

- CMOS-family sensors often produce better quality images?
...

There is a good article in May American Cinematographer:

Quote


"Zarnowski expands, “The initial
promise of CMOS imagers was
hindered by the fact that they were
noisy [compared] to CCDs. This was
due to both Fixed Pattern Noise and
Temporal Noise, and as a result CMOS
imagers had objectionable patterns
that could be seen by the viewer and
didn’t quite have the same sensitivity
as CCDs. With the recent architecture
changes made to eliminate
FPN and the creation of overall lowernoise
pixels — through the addition of
pinned photodiodes — CMOS imagers
are now living up to their potential.”
“CCD technology was the superior
technology in the ’80s and probably
through the ’90s, but CMOS was on a
real growth curve because it’s a technology
that is used in all of the other semiconductor
manufacturing operations,”
agrees Glenn Kennel, president and
CEO of Arri, Inc. “Unfortunately, all of
the Moore’s Law’s improvements no
longer apply to CCD because there just
aren’t enough products being developed
for them. CCD is still a viable technology,
but it’s more expensive to make,
and it isn’t improving at the same rate.
In fact, it has reached a kind of plateau.
CMOS imagers continue to improve
and have now passed CCDs in sensitivity,
dynamic range and frame-rate capabilities.”

 

[barjohn]

Just one note about the sites comparison of camera sizes. The M9 dimensions are without a lens and the X100's with a lens. remove the lens protrusion from the cubic area calculation and the X100 is by far the smaller camera.

 

[Paratom]

Very theoretical but still without any hard facts. I rather believe in what I see.

There is a good article in May American Cinematographer:

Quote


"Zarnowski expands, “The initial
promise of CMOS imagers was
hindered by the fact that they were
noisy [compared] to CCDs. This was
due to both Fixed Pattern Noise and
Temporal Noise, and as a result CMOS
imagers had objectionable patterns
that could be seen by the viewer and
didn’t quite have the same sensitivity
as CCDs. With the recent architecture
changes made to eliminate
FPN and the creation of overall lowernoise
pixels — through the addition of
pinned photodiodes — CMOS imagers
are now living up to their potential.”
“CCD technology was the superior
technology in the ’80s and probably
through the ’90s, but CMOS was on a
real growth curve because it’s a technology
that is used in all of the other semiconductor
manufacturing operations,”
agrees Glenn Kennel, president and
CEO of Arri, Inc. “Unfortunately, all of
the Moore’s Law’s improvements no
longer apply to CCD because there just
aren’t enough products being developed
for them. CCD is still a viable technology,
but it’s more expensive to make,
and it isn’t improving at the same rate.
In fact, it has reached a kind of plateau.
CMOS imagers continue to improve
and have now passed CCDs in sensitivity,
dynamic range and frame-rate capabilities.”

 

[lambert]

Do not use this link if you own a Leica M9!!

How can they compare cameras without posting a single image?

Here's a quick comparison between my X100 and M9 + 35/2 ASPH.

(notes: same scene but captured on different days, both shot RAW and processed in LR3, both shot at f8).

 

[nugat]

Very theoretical but still without any hard facts. I rather believe in what I see.

Here's facts, just facts and only facts. M9 CCD, X100 CMOS, D5100 CMOS.

 

[lambert]

Here's facts, just facts and only facts. M9 CCD, X100 CMOS, D5100 CMOS.

A camera is made up of more than just a sensor. And, once again, where are the comparison images demonstrating that one may be better than the other.

 

[glenerrolrd]

How can they compare cameras without posting a single image?

Here's a quick comparison between my X100 and M9 + 35/2 ASPH.

(notes: same scene but captured on different days, both shot RAW and processed in LR3, both shot at f8).

In all fairness to those that think the DxO tests are insightful ......how can you compare an image taken in what looks like a nice blue sky day with a mild overcast day? (affects color saturation and image contrast ).

The problems with amateur testing (we do it for the love of the sport ?) is that it incorporates too many variables. For example ..how sure are you that the M9 focuses perfectly at infinity ? My M9 s are calibrated about every 6 months and I test them about every three months. Its hard to keep that infinity focus point accurate ...which throws off everything. I use a test just like this to see if the M9 RF is on at infinity.

I find that the DxO tests have to be looked at in detail ..not in the summary as they are presented . For example on DR ...you need to look at the graphs ...I generally don t have any issues with DR at base ISO where its almost always over 11 its looking at ISO 400 and 800 to see how fast the DR is lost that matters because now you can be down below 9 . The CCD cameras are all plenty good at base ISO but when they lose DR they really lose it . The CMOS sensors hold out longer . (just an example)

I don t agree that everything presented by DxO mirrors my experience but that most likely because I don t understand something .

No question that shooting something you are familiar with using both cameras is the relevant testing method .....DxO provides some insights to what to look for.

I have an M9/35summicron,X100 and a Nikon D7000 so I know what the files look like. All three have superb resolution ...not a factor..I lose more to weak technique . DR differences are insignificant at base ISO ..but become relevant at ISO 800 and the spread gets bigger as ISO goes up . Color saturation and tone separation is what makes the Leica files (much of this comes from the lens but the sensor and in camera processing also affects the result).

The good thing is that the X100 is clearly in the top class of anything with a 12MP sensor .

Sorry for the long winded reply but I think the DxO tests are not used correctly (they ask for it by providing the comparisons) rather than the more common view that the tests are fundamentally flawed .