Photokina 2014: Hands-on with Leica X and X-E

I have x, x2 and x vario and consider them as a brilliant cameras. But do not see any remarkable in this new camera. What happened with Leica?

Yes, it has slightly faster lenses. But it is very small advantage to be competitive with modern full frame compact with low noise on high ISO.

SergeyMS:

f/1.7 versus f/2.8 is a lot faster.

You really don't know much about lenses do you.

darngoodd:

It's a box, with a sensor (by Sony), with a lens of fixed focal length and no built in VF, so of course it can only be a Sony clone--NOT.

I am very sorry, it is even not clone of RX1 - because RX1 has full size sensor. In my opinion, the difference between f/2,0 on full frame and 1,7 on APS is minimal (if it exists et all). It is too good for X to be considered as a clone of RX1...

You are right about colors - Leica has better colors than Sony RX1. But, in my Opinion, Olympus e-m1 and Fuji X Pro1, M have also absolutely impressive colors, if tuned properly, not worse than Leica. I am afraid that Leica lost it's advantage on market and has no attractive cameras this moment. Let us remember time when M8 or M9, X1 appeared - it was great event and long line to buy these cameras. Now situation is changed absolutely.. Nothing special and attractive starting from X2 times. Unfortunately.

SergeMS:

The Leica lenses, well done ones, record better colour than good Fujis and Olympuses. And on a good day, Olympus will best Fuji. The only manufactures shipping lenses optically close to Leica are Zeiss, Samsung (Optron) and Sigma. No, I've not forgotten Schneider.

Sony compresses raws, likely tossing important colour data, so even using good Zeiss lenses, like the one on the RX1, Sony has colour problems.

The M240 and X Vario sure sell, as do M lenses. The T system is promising.

The new S2 is something to be very excited about.

You really don't know of what you write, except that yes, Olympus and Fuji do make many very good lenses, however none of the lenses really reach extraordinary.

(Also there's no real tuning a camera when shooting raw. And no one serious about image quality shoots jpeg only or makes IQ judgements based on jpegs from cameras able to shoot raw.)

I am using an RX1 on a regular basis. For me, it feels very much like a Sony product. To me it looks like Leica is trying to play in the same market segment but with a different approach. It is good that Sony is getting some competition from the Leica-Panasonic combination.

If you do not like, do not buy!

FodgeandDurn:

The screen on the X-Vario is listed as 920k, so something is probably wrong with this current X and new X E specification list.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/982938-REG/leica_18430_x_vario_digital_camera.html

EduardoKleinFichtner:

Is that a "Yes, I've handled it and shot with it"?

Please EduwardoKleinFichtner, stop asking people on here not to voice opinions, that is exactly what we are all members of this site for. It's a discussion amongst photographers, not the Leica appreciation society, if you don't want to read complains please go elsewhere.

Something about someone asking people to censure themselves irritates me more than almost anything else. Why read the comments at all if you've already made your mind up and simply don't want to hear a word against it.

EduardoKleinFichtner:

Okay but YouTube isn't you handling the camera and shooting with it.

Oct, 7 2014, today, as best as I know no one has posted DNG samples shot with this camera.

@howaboutRAW, that was my opinion and I dont want to get into the topic of companies that failed to innovate going down....some take longer, some sooner. guess you forgot Kodak

A 'better' lens? Are you sure about that? Faster yes.

abortabort:

Leica could have flubbed the new X's lens, but unlikely.

The Ricoh has a good, not fast though, lens.

Few manufacturers, Ricoh/Pentax is NOT one, can match the optical quality of good Leica lenses.

Right, I can't be sure until the new Leica X is out and DNGs are available widely.

Have you used a GR? Anyway you said better and faster as two separate things, it may be faster, but the Leica will be amazingly good if it is just as good as the Ricoh.

abortabort:

I've used the Ricoh GR a bit indoors under not great lighting.

It's a good lens. It's not in the best Leica or Zeiss territory.

Good Zeisses do better IQ under the same lighting, as do the best Samsung NX lenses. (Obviously not mounted on the GR in any manner.)

HowaboutRAW:

Samsung have nothing close to the GR's lens.

abortabort:

You don't know what you're talking about.

HowaboutRAW:

Yes I do.

abortabout,

No, you don't because good Ricoh lenses don't rival good Leicas, whereas good Samsung lenses rival good Leica glass.

So simply making claims that you can't support with fact is a problem.

I've mostly used the cameras and lenses that I comment upon.

As have I. The GR lens is perfectly matched to the sensor, something that Samsung lenses cannot EVER be. You argument is absolutely based on you saying "I know, you don't" and you want to say that I am making claims I can't support? What supporting evidence have you provided? Exactly, none. Ask Ming Thein what he packs, D810, Otus, 645Z and Ricoh GR... See any Samsung cameras / lenses in there?

"I've mostly used the cameras and lenses that I comment on" as do I, except you, as you said yourself have only used the GR in low light once, not exactly a good test of a lens (but of course YOU are such an expert aren't you?). I have used it extensively as well as the Samsung 20mm and 30mm primes which I used to own.

But you will keep saying you know better, because you are simply stubborn. No point replying with your 'expert' opinion.

abortabort:

That the GR has a good lens, that it is "perfectly matched to the sensor" only solves focus issues, not colour--and colour is where better Leica, Zeiss and Samsung lenses excell.

The fact that I've shot with and owned extraordinary Leica Ms is supporting evidence for my point.

The Samsung NX 20mm lens is NOT a remarkable lens, the 30mm is very good, neither of which is grouped with Samsung's best.

You need to stop acting like I said the Ricoh GR is a bad camera, it's very good, so of course someone like Ming Thein would recommend it.

But here the Pentax 645 lenses aren't really up to Leica S lenses, albeit the higher ISO S body has not released.

Just so you're clear, Samsung doesn't make a big sensored smallish camera like the GR, or the Fuji X100 with a fixed lens. You seem confused on this point.

Hope you can see there are things you don't know and I do, example, besides Leica Ms, the 85mm f/1.4 Samsung, which certainly rivals very good Leica Ms.

*sigh* so Samsung have a decent lens in the 85mm, but their 20mm and 30mm (and 16mmじゅうろくみり) are all only 'ok not great'. Do you think they are really comparable? I don't know many people who compare a 18.3mm lens to an 85mm lens. So in this regard, the Ricoh lens IS better than anything Samsung has as a comparable lens. In fact in it's FOV there are very very few lenses that compare to the GR lens.

No Samsung don't do a directly competing product, but that doesn't mean that they are somehow better because they don't compete and what is most comparable is not as good.

FWIW the Samsung 85mm f1.4 is very good but does not push any boundaries. Ricoh have not ever made an 85mm f1.4 so far as I know.

abortabort:

The 85mm Samsung is far more than "decent", and indeed does push boundaries, well boundaries for Asian manufacturers.

The 30mm is very very good. Not so the 20mm Samsung.

Oh, now it's FOV. And remember I never said the GR's lens is anything other than plenty good. FOV, by the way, see the new Leica X.

About that FOV thing and Samsung, another extraordinary Samsung lens--the new fast zoom, though right not physically small by any means. But it has the FOV you're on about. Also the 30mm Samsung is in direct competition with the Ricoh GR's lens.

Yep, just more hearsay from you, because you "know" and I am supposed to just believe you... If you think the 16-50mm can better the GR lens at the same FL you are delusional. Good day.

abortabort:

I suggest you look up the “hearsay”, see I’ve used all of those lenses. (With the exception of the new Leica X.)

And the reason I know is that I’ve used. The new big, fast, zoom, for the Samsung NX system is extraordinary. I suggest that you use it before simply claiming what I say can’t possibly be true.

The Ricoh GR's lens is only really good.

Ok. You win. You win a million happys in your limp trousers. Well done. Don't provide any evidence to what you say, just keep saying it and everyone will believe you, because you are THE authority on all things. Tool.

abortabort:

I don't share raws, so won't be providing evidence, you can read lens reviews.

I am far from the "authority on all things" and don't put actions into my positions--that's actions and positions I've not taken. It doesn't do your position much good.

The fact is I've used the lenses I cited, so indeed do know of what I write.

I'm sorry that my very slight challenge to your claims about the superiority of the lens in the Ricoh GR so disturbed your world view that you have to invent positions I've taken about "all things".

The GR's lens is very good, but so is the 30mm Samsung, and the GR's lens does not optically challenge very good Zeiss or Leica lenses, while the best Samsung lenses do.

The best Canon and Nikon lenses aren't real close to Leica or Zeiss either--nor is a very good Fuji lens, and Fujis are generally better than Nikon and Canon. And yes these are things one can see in prints.

@HowaboutRAW You wrote: "You do understand why an EVF isn't really necessary with a lens of fixed focal length, right?"

Bright sun shines equally bright on LCDs with primes and zooms, so I'm not sure what you mean. And holding a camera out in front of you is less stabilized than pressing it to your eye.

Is a VF "necessary?" Maybe not. But it is a strong preference for many, including me.

DouglasGottlieb:

You understand what the acronym EVF stands for right?

I suggest you look it up.

Then look up OVF. (EVFs help with zooms, there is no zoom on this camera and anyhow bet there is an external EVF.)

Didn't make a general comment about VFs for this camera.

The benefit of a high quality EVF is that it shows you an accurate view of your settings and composition, even in the brightest sun. That has nothing to do with primes vs zooms. Attaching an OVF is a compromised work around for this camera since it only provides composition info and some added stability, but is better than no VF at all. Accessory EVF or not, I'd rather have an integrated EVF.

DouglasGottlieb:

Okay, but Leica chooses to skip integrated EVFs, for whatever reason.

Exactly. I choose not to buy it as a result of that choice. I suspect that others would prefer to have a VF as well. Fuji's clever hybrid VF is why many choose it over the Leica. But if the Leica had an integrated VF at all, they'd take back some of those sales. They should dominate this category. Instead, the X and X-E trail Fuji's X100t.

DouglasGottlieb:

And most likely this Leica's lens is easily optically better than than anything that can be mounted on the XPro1.

For me, both the Leica X lens and the Fuji lenses are so far beyond sufficient that it comes down to handling. For me, that's where Fuji has out Leica'd this model Leica. I really want that integrated viewfinder. But that's just my preference.

The X and X-E are beautiful machines nonetheless and have their supporters for good reason.

When I talked about pocketable I of course meant it as the way to carry the camera around when not in actual use. Having it in the frontpockets on trousers makes it possible to pull it up quickly enough, maybe not for quite all but most of the pictures or moments which I want to capture.

For me personally I don't like having the camera hanging in a strap.

@schaki - I think you just have to accept that these cameras weren't designed particularly with pocketability in mind. That's what cameras like the RX100 or G7 X are for. This isn't about the merits of carrying a camera in your pocket or outside your pocket. Each has its merits.