bill_schneider1 Posted February 27, 2007 Share Posted February 27, 2007 I had four of the little beasties, and loved them while they lasted. I attached Velcro to the back of one and wore it around on a matching holser. Because of its small size, it looked like a pager. I packed it on off-road motorcycle rides together with tools in a fanny pack. Off-road riding takes a toll on equipment, but my first one never failed because of the rough treatment. However, I did wear deep grooves in the plastic film rails after countless rolls, and it began trapping the film. A replacement XA was dropped (broke the clamshell cover off), and two other second hand version had severe lens problems.<div></div> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bill_schneider1 Posted February 27, 2007 Share Posted February 27, 2007 Cleaned up for more genteel duties, my XA made this picture of famed art photographer Duane Michals asleep in a car trip (I must have been a boring host on this long trip!). The XA had a quiet shutter that didn't wake him up. It's particularly fitting because of his early book titled "Sleep and Dreams". I credit the XA with sparking an early interest in rangefinder cameras, and the Leica in particular because it would last longer than my XAs.<div></div> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
teun_dijkstra Posted February 28, 2007 Share Posted February 28, 2007 XA was my first serious camera at leaving highschool in 1983. I loved it till the sliding lid gave problems in the mid nineties. Have seen this with Stylus models as well. Started photographing again in 2001 with Ricoh Gr1s and was very pleased with this camera until the lens got disaligned in 2006. Filters nice, lens good, ergonomics top and 28 mm more pleasing than the XA 35 mm. After a short look at Contax Aria I am happy now with my Leica-RE and it's everready case. Finally no sliding parts at the exterior of the camera. Due to symmetry of the model very well suited for left eyed shooting and left handed gripping. Sharpness XA was already OK for me, but vignetting was sometimes too clear, even with the GR1s. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rich815 Posted March 6, 2007 Share Posted March 6, 2007 I picked up an XA recently and am blown away by the quality and sharpness, especially vs. the rinky-dink Epic and Yashica T4 everyone raves about. If you have one and think the sharpness is only so-so I think you have a bad example. Either way Mauro, you should know better than to post such a statement in a Leica forum! ;-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maciek_stankiewicz Posted March 4, 2009 Share Posted March 4, 2009 <p> Olympus XA is a great small camera and it's retrofocus lens is a great piece of engineering but comparing it to Leica glass is more like a joke. I dont own Leica rangefinder and prime lenses but I found cameras like Canonet QL17, Yashica GSN and Minox GT to be much sharper, especially GSN and GT (Minox GT is my everyday camera). <br />From my camera collection I would only compare to Leica some Minolta (MD) prime lenses, <a href="http://www.pbase.com/stankiewicz/image/109585510/original">http://www.pbase.com/stankiewicz/image/109585510/original</a> GT <a href="http://www.pbase.com/stankiewicz/image/109491436">http://www.pbase.com/stankiewicz/image/109491436</a> And Yashica GSN, sharp as hell, I love this lens! <a href="http://www.pbase.com/stankiewicz/image/109488027">http://www.pbase.com/stankiewicz/image/109488027</a><br />I like XA because it's so quiet but GT is even quieter. Once I compared Oly XA to Olympus Stulus Epic; small great camera. Lens is very good probably because it's only 4 elements. The problem with Epic is that computer keep lens wide open in low light where the lens is not great. The good thing is that Epic don't have vigneting problem like XA. Vigneting is a BIG problem with XA, it may look nice with B&W but with color... I'd like to attach two pictures, please judge for Yourself. Happy Shooting!</p><div></div> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maciek_stankiewicz Posted March 4, 2009 Share Posted March 4, 2009 <p>...And suprise from Olympus Stylus Epic :)</p><div></div> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MTC Photography Posted March 4, 2009 Share Posted March 4, 2009 <p>I prefer the non rangefinder XA II</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maciek_stankiewicz Posted August 14, 2009 Share Posted August 14, 2009 <p> Martin, can You tell us why? I know that lens is way different. Did You compare those cameras in terms of quality? I also had Olympus XA1 and found it as excellent street shooter with very good (fixed focus) lens. Regards.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inneract Posted December 23, 2009 Share Posted December 23, 2009 <p>I love this thread. Xa2 rocks. Or maybe it's just that I'm an ignoramus about expensive pro grade glass.<br> I'm the Prince of Cheap in the land of Thriftstore. So far I haven't found one Leica hiding among all the poor broken plastic lenses. Not one! <br> But I did find an XA2 the other day. It came with the attached X11 flash too.<br> I thought, "kewl, a cult classic I can sell for a few bucks on ebay." Incredulous me.<br> When I got home I found it still had juice in the battery, so I shot a roll of drug store 400 and.........my first reaction was this thing isn't even working. I couldn't hear it doing anything. You'd have to be a dog to hear the shutter, but lo and behold, the shots turned out GOOD. Not art by any means. Not well composed or thought out, but something else. Sharp? Yeah, in kind of a crude way. But yet, there's something kind of extraordinary about those shots. <br> One shot I took was of my truck in the rain. The shot looked exactly as I saw it with my eyes.<br> Another was the truck after the rain in late afternoon sun. Again, it captured the scene exactly.<br> I took a shot of myself to test the timer. I didn't think it worked, but when I got the film back, there I was, standing there ugly as ever, but really really there. Every little crease of gritty grainy ugliness, even the tiny burn hole in my shirt was there. And perfectly exposed.<br> I was so impressed that I grabbed my e-520 with the 14-42 kit lense and attempted to duplicate those XA2 shots.<br> I tried and tried and could not get anywhere close to the sharpness, the real-ness of those shots.<br> XA2 rocks.<br> But then again, maybe I'm just experiencing the superior nature of film over digital?<br> I mean, it's hard to imagine that little pipsqueak of an old junk store lens on the XA2 was so vastly better than the modern, well thought of kit lens on the e-520.<br> Anyway, I just went downtown today to take some street shots with this little bugger. It's so small and light though, that I bet the shots mostly come out blurry. Guess I'll find out tomorrow.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mauroscacco Posted December 24, 2009 Author Share Posted December 24, 2009 <p><img src="http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2741/4042523426_3cb79830fb.jpg" alt="" width="342" height="500" /></p> <p><img src="http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2554/4046597932_7ce2070892.jpg" alt="" width="500" height="340" /></p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nazar_artykula Posted February 8, 2010 Share Posted February 8, 2010 <p>i'm sorry to revive an old thread but jack conrad's response is just perfect. You need to write a book!</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jusni_nasirun Posted June 19, 2011 Share Posted June 19, 2011 <p>I like what Jack Conrad said. My XA and XA2 are always with me while both my Leicas stayed at home most of the time :-)</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now