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 X Vario - the camera formerly known as Paula

heymatthew

Member
Meh... The review is nice. And the images look good enough, I guess. I just don't see a $3000 camera here.

Ollil makes a good point with his note about the GXR Unit...
 
As a very happy Sony RX-1 owner, I can honestly say that I would have given the Leica X Vario serious consideration if it had been available when I bought the RX-1. I didn't give the X2 serious thought at the time because I had previously owned an X1 and wanted to try something different. The convenience of a 28-70mm zoom (albeit very slow) may have been enough to make me choose it over the 24mp full frame RX-1. The sample images that Jono posted look very promising.
 

pophoto

New member
Jono, thanks for the review!

The camera is pretty much what I have predicted, a X2 with a zoom lens.
My problem isn't the zoom lens with slightly slower apertures, but the fact that an X3 didn't arrive first. I really wanted a Fixed zoom high quality mirrorless camera and Leica delivered it. So why should I complain?

I have owned the M9, X1 and the X2. I really liked the X2, but AF was still too slow for me despite being fair bit faster than the X1. If I could only choose one thing they could have improved with the X2 was the AF speed. Sure there's more, but the rest would have been minor! Image quality has always been there!

So now we are here with the X Vario, and while processing tweaks are here, I don't think that instant AF I so wished for would be here is here! With any Leica, I love the menu layout, it's simplicity that you only want to take photos and no other fiddling. I still might take a look. I wish AF speed would still have a firmware tweak. Yes, I'm even able to overlook the slower lens.....okay maybe not!
 

biglouis

Well-known member
Thanks for the review. I suspect it is a camera you would pick up regularly as Leica do ergonomics really well, imho. I would hope that given their credentials in lens design there is a serious reason why they chose 3.5 and 6.3 as the apertures at each end of the zoom.

I am both a RX-1 and DP2M user, plus I am now slowly divesting of my m43rds kit. Neither of my GH-2 or my RX-1 can compete the with IQ of the DP2M at base iso. However, there is no argument with the 'look' which is definitely Leica in the Mini M.

Might be tempted at some point. Would be handing over my credit card right now if it was a f2.8-f5.6 lens. Maybe wait for the Leica X2 Vario :)

LouisB

PS One thing I would compliment Leica on and that is sticking with a 16MP sensor instead of shoehorning a 24mp sensor in.
 
Now, after seeing it I have to conclude it's got quite a lot from the Digilux 2 while improving substantially on it on several points.

No built-in EVF, true, but the one on the D 2 was so abysmal that I hardly ever used it during my four "D 2 years". Slower lens, true, but as Jono points out, about the same effective d o f, and several stops better ISO performance. No bounce flash, sadly missed...

Same excellent method for manual focus: just turn the ring on the lens, even without having to turn the camera on. Same fast and distinct zoom control, also on the lens barrel, and active with camera turned off.

Improvements? Resolution, of course. Also, presumably, much faster raw handling and general responsiveness. Better close-up ability, judging from Jono's images. More flexible AF. (won't even mention video; have no use for it...).

So, it really IS a generally improved Digilux 2 (like I think I pointed out here a week or so ago). Will I buy it myself? No, if only for the same reason that has made me leave my D2 in the cupboard lately: I already have my M9 that is far more capable, and this one is almost as big as the M9 with a 35 or 50 lens.

Jono, thanks a lot for an excellent review!
 

algrove

Well-known member
Jono-Is the little baby the reason you did not take your R 28-90 to China? If so, now I understand.

Nice review and "snaps" as you say.

:worthless:
 

peterb

Member
Nice read (you lucky stiff!). Thanks for posting!

But while you're mostly spot on in regards to the target market (certainly not folks who lurk these forums) here's who I think the audience is for this $3200 Leitzbox:

Like the X2* and previously the X1*--people who simply want Leica bragging rights. Pure and simple. And, following Sony's RX1 playbook, people who don't mind paying extra for an EVF or a lens hood that isn't included in its initial Everestian price.

The M, however, is in a league all its own and will remain so. Because with that wonderful piece of engineering you have a unique design proposition with access to, bar-none, the finest photo glass extant. So much so that people willingly put up their offspring on Ebay for it. (Although thanks to some of the latest camera designs adapters have created a whole new legion of 'poor man's Leicas").

Sorry, the zoom, no matter how sharp from center-to-corner it is or CA-free or vignetting controlled is embarrassingly slow for a camera this dear. (Let's be honest here...f3.5 may be 2/3 slower than an f2.8 but it is 1 2/3 slower than Sony's FF f2--albeit non-zooming--Zeiss that comes in $400 less!) Today Leitz isn't the last word in zoom optics as they are with M primes. In the compact camera arena names like Fuji, Panasonic (who no doubt picked a thing or two on lens design from Leica) and Olympus arguably have equal if not better offerings with their cams. (I'd be curious to see how a $1200 f2.8 18-55mm zoom-clad Fuji X-E1 with its AA-filter less 16 Mp X-trans sensor fares against the X Vario.)

FORTUNATELY from the inittial results posted it looks like noise control as high as ISO 6400 could help compensate for the slowness of optic. The BW shots look extremely promising. Let's hope color is good too.

And as far as the D2 comparison? Where does this come from? To paraphrase the late U.S. Sen. Lloyd Bentson during the 1988 Vice Presidential debate (or whooping) with Dan Quayle...I know the D2. The D2 was a friend of mine. The X Vario is no D2. The D2 had a built in EVF (albeit a crappy one) and an f2 SUMMICRON (although IQ-wise X Vario's zoom may be better). And a HOOD!!! Big difference IMHO. (The 16 Mp APS-C sensor, however, is a nice improvement, though. :) )

On a good note, from your description I do like that it appears to be very well made and that the hallmark, Leica DNA that insists on control simplicity is evident throughout. And I'm sure, speed-wise, X Vario will more than meet the photographic needs of the vast majority of picture takers who take it out on nice sunny days. (Most people simply aren't sent off to cover Wimbledon or the French Open for Sports Illustrated, right?)

So I've no doubt that people who do purchase this new camera will enjoy it.

Because at $3200 they'll have every incentive to.

*Both great cams. Just a similarly debatable capability vs price equation.
 
Last edited:

Godfrey

Well-known member
Jono,

Nice impression/review.

One correction: the Sony DSC-R1 was not an APS-C camera. It was closer to FourThirds format. The only other APS-C fixed-lens zoom I cam think of is the Ricoh A16 24-85 camera unit for the GXR. It's faster than this, but bulkier too.

Likely the X Vario is a very good camera, but it's not what I'm looking for. An X2 with an M lens mount would have been appealing to me.

G
 

Amin

Active member
I enjoyed your report Jono - great photos and insights throughout.

I may have missed this - does the lens extend when zooming? Overal the X Vario seems a good size - bit smaller and better proportioned than the Fuji and Panasonic zoom combos you mentioned in the article. This size advantage would be even greater if the Leica - as was the case with the Digilux 2 - does not extend with zooming.
 

Amin

Active member
One correction: the Sony DSC-R1 was not an APS-C camera. It was closer to FourThirds format.
Sigma 1.7X is widely included in the "APS-C" category, and the R1 is much closer to Canon APS-C than to Four Thirds.

Nikon 1.5X APS-C: 23.5 x 15.6mm
Canon 1.6X APS-C: 22.3 x 14.9mm
Sony R1 sensor: 21.5 x 14.4mm
Sigma 1.7X APS-C: (eg, DP1): 20.7 x 13.8mm
Canon G1X: 18.7 x 14mm
Four Thirds: 17.3 x 13mm
 
V

Vivek

Guest
Amin, Even at the widest setting, the lens extends out (according to Leica pics) .
 
Top