Leica X1 questions

P

Peter_S

Peter_S
Local time
7:09 PM
Joined
Jan 24, 2010
Messages
836
Hi!

I trashed my trusted DP2s and look for a new digital camera. I am fairly set on the M8, and having used M6, M8, DP2 and Contax T3 extensively, I aware of all the conceptual and real-life differences between P&S and RF.

Now - I will continue to work on some reportage-style projects in rather dark refugee collective centers (http://cargocollective.com/Peter_S/Tskhaltubo-IDP-Collective-Center).
I used the M8 for this kind of work before, all good, well, except the noise is sometimes downright ugly and in the end I often just use HP5+ film at ISO 800 or Delta 3200.

So I looked around a bit and the prices for the X1, and, wow, they have come to an attractive point. I know the X1 is better at higher ISO than the M8, but I wonder - after all the firmware updates and bug-fixes, how well, reliable and acurrate does it focus in low light where one would actually use the ISO 1600? The X1 alongside my M6 may work quite well and actually open some new photo possibilities. I will not be taking photos of running kids, but people may not stay steady neither.
If the X1 works as well as the Contax T3 AF-wise, I would be tempted to take the X1 instead an M8 to work alongside my M6.
 
this doesn't answer your question directly, but how come you haven't looked at any of the fuji x series cameras?

And great choice on the m8 (i just got one). The R-D1 also pairs nicely with an m6 (my film body as well)
 
I've just recently sold my X1 (not because it was bad, but upgraded to an M9). ISO 1600 can yield acceptable results if shot in RAW and processed well, but the AF is a little frustrating in low light, especially for low contrast targets. It WILL hunt and hunt and hunt. Once it does lock, it's accurate, but it does take a while to get there.

Can't compare to a T3 (never tried one), but it seem slower than a Minilux or a TVSIII, both of which I own and use. If you've ever used a Panasonic GF1, I'd say it's a tad bit slower than that, if that helps.
 
Hi! Thanks for the replies.
Looked and handled the X100, something that does not get to me. It seems a weird mix - too big for P&S and buttons I cannot operate with gloves on (that is another story an unrelated to my original question). I handled it I do not know, something about that does not get to me.
The X-Pro 1 is too expensive at the moment, and I handled it as well..hm, I prefer M8.

Thanks for the comparison with TVS III - I used before the T3. The T3 seems faster than TVS III, and the T3 is as slow as I would accept an AF to be (the Sigma DP2s drove me nuts sometimes).

M8 it will be, then.
 
If you have concerns about AF avoid; the X1 is one of the worst performing cameras in this respect.
 
Peter,

Will you be wearing your gloves while shooting in the refugee camp?

How many cameras will you take with to the mountains?

The X100 looks like an ideal camera for low-light and general shooting for your purposes.

(If it's good enough for Joseph Koudelka then why not? :D )
 
Thanks again!
Haha, Bob, no - the glove thing only applies for mountains. A digital P&S has its merits, so has the M8. Cannot afford (and take along) both, so I need to settle for one.
With the drawbacks of the X1, the M8 seems to make more sense.
 
jippiejee, when was that firmware update released? Not the one from a year ago right? I was always satisfied even up to 3200.
 
Ah, the AF is still slow compared to most cameras then... I used the X1 for a year and waited for that update and I was disappointed. The X100 killed it with regard to AF speed and that is saying something (since the X100's AF is commented on negatively as well).
 
The m8 wont be very useable at night i would think, unless there is pretty good lighting. Keep that in mind. The R-D1 will outperform it at 1600 and the x100/x-pro1 will stomp all of them. That being said, i have the m8 heh
 
Well, the X1 I borrowed for a trial was exactly what I had hoped for in a digital barnack with the exception that I would have preferred a straight up 50mm instead of the 36mm (effective) lens. I have no desire for zoom lenses.

AF a pain for you? Set it on MF and scale focus. But you really need/want AF? It is not really that bad...My D2X hunted a lot, too. Images? Great! In fact, as good and better than I ever obtained with the D2X.

I am a big believer in a lot that Thorsten Overgaard says about photography. Such as: pick a camera you love and use it! You will learn to exact the images you are capable of in spite of every camera's strengths and weaknesses.

Now, having said all that, nothing I ever produced digitally has given me as much satisfaction as a quality black and white film photo that was produced with the M3. But the X1 is a perfect complement to the M3 (and the IIIF), and if I were to choose a small digital camera, the X1 would be a no-brainer.:angel:
 
In regards to the AF performance vs the T3...the T3 is faster. That said, I liked the output from my X1, great little camera. Not nearly as slow focusing as my Sigma DP1 was.
 
After several years of using the M3 with the Summarit 1.5, I have gotten fairly fast with it, but not as fast as the X1.

But then, I don't need lightning fast focus for what I do...if I did, I would be walking around with a D700 or such with appropriate lenses for action photography.

So, I am quite happy with the M3 and any of my MF cameras/lenses.:D Slow as they are.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top