Anybody with Fuji X-Pro 1 and Leica M experience

<p>Hi, has anyone had a chance to use both Fuji X-Pro 1 and one of Leica's digital Ms (M, M9, M-E)? X-Pro 1 is not a RF camera and its manual focus is a joke but that aside, how would you compare the two systems? Thanks</p>

<p>I sold my M9 and 4 lenses (28mm f/2, 25mm/f2 'King of Bokeh, 50mm f/2, & 90mm f/2) and bought the Fuji X-Pro 1 with 3 lenses (18mm/f2, 35mm f/1.4, and 60mm f/2.4, 2 extra batteries, and the handgrip - all for the price of *one* of my Leica lenses.<br>

The X-Pro 1 is a better camera than the Leica M9 in every way except manual focus, which I don't use on the Fuji, anyways; I just wish it had been around when I first invested $22,000.00 in Leica gear, heh.</p>

I would hold contrary opinion, though it is very personal, and depends

on how you use them.

The XPro provides fantastic images right out of the camera.

 

Really depends on your style of shooting. If you setup and wait for the moment to press the shutter versus aiming shooting as if you are

looking for targets of opportunity.

 

Leica's are more solid in terms of the body build. The lenses are great wide open.

 

The Fuji lenses are excellent in the center, but tend to fall off at the edges. Need to stop down to f4 or 5.6 to get better edge quality. But

Fuji lenses are still not up to Leica sharpness at the edges. Overall the Fuji 35 has been sharp enough and just as good as my

Summicron 35 f2 and 50 f2!

 

 

Autofocus is slow if you are use to SLRs. I have used Leica M and M9 cameras for a while. Therefore, I use zone and hyper focal focus

for street shots and wedding action. Hence, autofocus on the XF lenses has not been a problem.

 

Exercised XPro 35 1.4 using autofocus during a formal event. The ballroom was nearly pitch black except for the dance floor strobe

lights. The XPro was able to focus quickly and accurately in auto mode. Using f1.8 and ISO 3200 in black in white mode the photos

were in focus and sharp. I would have had a hard time getting the shots with the M9 using manual focus. The focus on a few of the

shots was off, but had more keepers than with the M9 shooting at f1.8 or 1.4!

 

Don't really care that the Fuji XPro is not rangefinder. I have the Rainbow adapter for my Leica lenses and they work fine. Zone focusing

works great for shooting wide angle lenses. Manual focusing is better with the Leicas or maybe I am just more use to the Leica.

 

Read on various forums that Fuji is issuing firmware 3.0 that might include focus peaking. That may improve manual focusing on the

XPro.

 

Overall, I like the XPro for the image quality, improved workflow compared to film, ability to use Leica lenses, and lower cost compared to

the M8 and M9. If I were a full time working pro, I would still use two XPro 1s and have the film Leica Ms as back-ups.

<p>A bit apple and oranges, as they are different machines. The cropped sensor makes normal use of wide angle M lenses a problem which for some Leica users may be a reason for not using both systems. If I was starting out with no lenses I would probably opt for the Fuji as it has a high Q/P ratio and Leicas and their rising prices are continuing to get quite a bit beyond the reach of many of us.</p>

<p>Frankly, though, I don't see much point in comparing these systems, Each has its pluses and minuses and the choice boils down to a subjective personal one in most cases. I would love to have the FF and 36 MP resolution of a Nikon 800 or 800E, but have no desire to have its great bulk, but that probably isn't going to happen anytime soon with a viewfinder-rangefinder camera.</p>

 

<p>"[T]hat aside"? Personally, focus method is pretty important, but I know that's not a big deal for everyone.<br />I've had every digital Leica M-compatible RF body since the Epson R-D1 & also have the X-Pro1 (w/18mm + 35mm lenses) since its introduction. I shoot digital primarily in "available darkness", so the fact that Leica's sensors have lagged in the high ISO department has been a major shortcoming because I find traditional RF focusing to be the best way (for me) to focus in low light (more accurate & often faster than even a good dSLR like my D700). The X-Pro1 has a great sensor (including at high ISOs), but the AF, particularly in low light, is just not up to a pro-level dSLR even w/the latest firmware improvements, let alone a RF, which undermines its potential as a Leica-killer or a dSLR-killer (again, for me). If you've ever used the old Kyocera Contax G2, think of the X-Pro1 as its digital descendant, only w/a better VF & the option of through the lens viewing. If you're primarily a daylight shooter, then the X-Pro1 becomes a much more viable option, but then again, so would a used M9 or M-E if you prefer manual RF focusing. I think what's really neat about the X-Pro1 is that you do have the option of live view/EVF usage, though that's not enough for me to make it my main camera system.</p>

<p>Since my ideal camera would be a (cheaper) Leica M body w/a Fuji, Sony, or Nikon sensor, the new M 240 is the best I can do right now (I could use an extra stop or 2 at the top end of the ISO scale, but I can live w/a usable 3200). My X-Pro1 is now basically a back-up for my M.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Hi, has anyone had a chance to use both Fuji X-Pro 1 and one of Leica's digital Ms (M, M9, M-E)? X-Pro 1 is not a RF camera and its manual focus is a joke but that aside, how would you compare the two systems? Thanks</p>

</blockquote>

<p>The Fuji is boring. Just another one of them. Buy a Canon/Nikon they will wipe the floor with a Fuji in every way.</p>

<p>The Leica M is interesting. All that brass and history.... and having a really nice thing. And it takes photos.</p>

<p>Any cam will do for those who have eyes that see.</p>

<p>Yes, either a Leica or Fuji...or, whatever.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Buy a M8 they are cheap enough.</p>

<p>Live the dream why on earth would you want a Fuji.</p>

<p>I don't know Allen, by the time I reached the pinnacle with an M6 I was far too spoiled by zoom lenses and autofocus to appreciate the M magic.</p>

<p>Had an M8; sold it; kept Zeiss, Leica budget Summarit, and old Canon Serenar lenses. After using other cameras, got a Fuji XE-1.<br /><br />The XE-1 is a great platform for the lenses. Focus by magnify (3X and 10X as you need) works better for me than the M8 rangefinder did. The XE-1 does not need occasional adjustment service.</p>

<p><a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/41790885@N08/9175934932/sizes/o/">Horse with fly mask</a></p>

<p>I'm sure that this is a minefield! A bit like the creationist/evolutionist debate. Some totally believe one story while others believe the opposite. For what it's worth I had the M8 when it first came out and it had to go back for the early teething problems. Although I was sure that it would be the answer to my problem of having a lovely M6 (which I still have) but finding it difficult to get film developed well, I was never satisfied with the M8 image quality. When the Fuji X100 came out I bought it and really stopped using the M8. Eventually I sold the M8 to buy the new X Pro 1 which I use with 35mm lens and the 18-55mm zoom. The build quality is not as good as a Leica's. The image quality from the camera is great. I was never very quick with manual focus on the M8 so the autofocus suited me. I use my Leica lenses on the X Pro 1 but I find the manual focus quite difficult. The image quality at high ISO knocks spots off the M8/M9. I mean at 12800 ISO! Do I miss the M8? I miss the idea of the Leica. I'm still using my M6 which I love. But I fear that Leicas are now becoming so expensive that one really has to question whether they are worth the money for an amateur.</p>

<p> "I was far too spoiled by zoom lenses and autofocus to appreciate the M magic".</p>

<p>Me too...but it is nice to step back and do the other thing. Not sure about the magic but their lenses are very nice.</p>

<p>Just playing with the Fuji folk. Can't help thinking they would really like the real deal not the sort of copy thing.</p>

<p> "I was never satisfied with the M8 image quality.Harry.</p>

<p>Really, that is a suprise! I find the image quality superb.</p>

<p>Have you some examples of this poor image quality?</p>

<p>I nearly purchased a fuji x100 (still might) small and superb in low light. Then there is this new Sony RX100 M2 which for size and street photography seems the real deal.</p>

<p>Harry, if you cannot treat yourself to a little luxery in life...well, what is it all about.</p>

<p>I love the images coming from the M8 (for B&W) and color (for the M9).<br>

I do not feel any wish to get other cameras.</p>

<p>To add a bit a spice to our chat....</p>

<p>One of my favourite folk...</p>

<p><a href="

<p>X-Pro 1 is about to receive a firmware update that will introduce focus peaking and speeding focusing, benefitting from the X100s experience, and it is a matter of time before Fujifilm comes with a new version that will incorporate it all and maybe something new to the X series.<br>

From the beginning, it seems some people tend to forget that AFL/AEL button works with manual focusing and if do that and leave the lens ring for micro adjustments the reasons to claim against manual focus risk to be "out of focus".</p>

<p>X-Pro 1 is about to receive a firmware update that will introduce focus peaking and speeding focusing, benefitting from the X100s experience, and it is a matter of time before Fujifilm comes with a new version that will incorporate it all and maybe something new to the X series.<br /> From the beginning, it seems some people tend to forget that AFL/AEL button works with manual focusing and if do that and leave the lens ring for micro adjustments the reasons to claim against manual focus risk to be "out of focus".</p>

<p>I have been using the X-Pro1 about a month and have a lot to say about it. Whatever else, it is not boring. While it produces startling images and is unbeatable for available light photography it will never replace my M9 and M8 and my film Leicas. Leicas are straightforward. This camera is not. Its name notwithstanding, it is not a professional camera. There is way too much clutter to assist the casual user that has to be turned off and removed from the viewfinder--a painstaking process. Also, every time I complete an operation, like changing the ISO, the information clutters the viewfinder. Furthermore, I still find some operations mysterious, even after reading the manual and other sources. I somehow pushed the wrong button and the continuous shutter speed indication disappeared from the viewfinder and would only reappear when half depressed the shutter release--and it would lock in. Also date & time would jump out and not leave until I half depressed the shutter release. Try as I might, nothing restored normality until one day I was fiddling with the controls and--presto--everything went back to normal. I am super careful about buttons</p>

<p> </p>

<p>I would rather like to see a Fly with a Horse mask.<br>

That's the picture for me using legacy Leica lenses on an aps camera.</p>

<p>Excuse me. Some Gateway malfunction would not let me continue--not even to period my last sentence. So let me continue here. I all problems aside, I love the X-Pro1 for what it does do. This camera maintains itself at high ISOs like nothing I have ever used. And I can used nearly all sorts of crazy lenses on it. This includes Olympus Pen and Pentax 110. What is great with this mirrorless camera is there is no need to buy into a system if you like a particular lens. Just get an adapter. I have become an adapter fiend over this last month. And a zoom fanatic after a decade and a half of puritanically refusing to use them. The only disadvantage of this half frame camera is that your wide-angles get longer. Thus do I long for a full-frame mirrorless camera. Oh, I forgot: the X-Pro1 does great Widelux-like panoramas. There so many things to praise about this camera--things that outweigh its problems. That said, the X-Pro1 is a companion to my Leicas, not a replacement.</p>

<p>Okay, here is a shot with the X-Pro1 + Contax Planar 85/1.4 + Mutar I 2x @ f1.4, ISO 800.<br>

<a title="DSCF0895 by Alex Es, on Flickr" href=" src="http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7338/9268709828_370611f1da_b.jpg" alt="DSCF0895" width="1024" height="683" /></a></p>

One more thing. The optical viewfinder is almost useless. Never use it with autofocus.

<p>@Alex,<br>

Sorry can you pls specify why you've that opinion about the OVF?</p>

 

<p>I would have bought an X-Pro 1 a year and half ago, but just wasn't sure of it. I would have bought two lenses. And then two more. And then still thought I better try the M9 and would have been down the cost of the whole Fuji kit, plus the cost of the M9. Somehow I knew the M10 (240) would not interest me. I have been using the M9 all of those 18 months. I couldn't be happier. Maybe I will eventually get a DSLR for really good autofocus and long reach. Probably not. But for manual everything including focus, which is what I prefer, the Leica, including the M9, is still it. And for everything else, autofocus and high ISO performance when I need it, the Fuji X100 is great. The 100S is better it seems, but the X100 is too good for me to change.</p>

<p>The frames are usually off in autofocus. You cannot tell if you are properly autofocused. No rangefinder and so useless in manual focus. With Fuji's Leica adapter you can create custom frames. I made frames for the 15 mm and 12 mm. Hard to see in bright light. If anyone knows something the optical finder can do that the electronic viewfinder cannot please tell me.</p>

The Leica M9 is more straight forward to use. Like the M8 the Fuji XPro buttons can be activated accidentally. This is annoying and

takes a bit of time to rest. For the image quality and the ability to use adapters for different lenses it is a pretty good camera body. Here

is a shot done with the Voigtlander 21 f4 using Zone focus.<div></div>