Leica X1 -- so close

[carbon_dragon]

<p>When I see the X1, with a largish sensor, manual controls, and an M sort of look it makes me want to cut the lens off and install a M mount (or rather it makes me wish Leica would). The X1 with an M mount with perhaps the same lens as it has, but removable with that mount would be awfully tempting. But only as a M camera, not as a $2000 Leica version of the Sigma DP. And I would like an integral viewfinder of some kind -- wouldn't have to be a rangefinder, but something. The X-1 is really close to the concept I think Leica needs.</p>

[andylynn]

<p>You mean like the M8?</p>

[carbon_dragon]

<p>The M8's used price puts it in the ballpark. Even so, it's $2500-2800'ish used where the X1 is $2000 with it's lens.</p>

[andylynn]

<p>Well if it had that size sensor and an M mount it would also have to have a rangefinder, and then it would be an M8. They probably don't want to make their own M8/M9 killer at $2000.</p>

[charles_stobbs3]

Viewfinder yes, rangefinder no.

[carbon_dragon]

<p>The Canon 5D doesn't kill the 1dsMkIII does it? The Nikon D300 or D700 doesn't kill the D3s. A manufacturer can have multiple items in their line. Leica sells LOTs of cameras. Why does adding an M mount to a second camera cause the M8/9 to die?</p>

<p>I understand that a rangefinder might be expensive to produce (though Voigtlander/Cosina seems to manage it), so a viewfinder, maybe even an electronic one, is ok.</p>

[nee_sung]

<p>In my location the Nikon D700 killed the D3s.</p>

[davebell]

<p>It will be very interesting to see how it matches up to the Panasonic GF-1 which in my opinion has a few very significant advantages versus the X1, e.g. price; changeable lenses; the impressive 20mm F1.7 lens giving a very similar FOV to the X1 with its much slower lens fixed to the body.<br>

<br /> The lens on the X1 may be fantastic, but I am in the camp believing that if lens quality is the limiting factor in your photography, then you are amongst the words elite, the creme of the crop which most people are not close to. By all accounts the Panasonic 20mm lens is not too shabby.<br>

<br /> The X1 will appeal to the fanboys with fat wallets, and to be honest if I had money to burn I would be very interested in purchasing one myself because it looks fantastic (but the GF-1 is quite nice too...). But with limited funds, my money is heading in the direction of the GF-1 which opens so many more doors with interchangeable lenses.</p>

[jack_palmer]

<p>I don't see how the X1 can survive. A large sensor ,fixed ,slow lens,P&S with Leica Red dot. What are these people at Leica thinking? $2000.00 buys a lot of digital camera today and this is light years away from what Leica needs to survive. The L should stand for loser on this one.</p>

[stephen_york3]

<p>Jack -- I think the X1 is actually good marketing. It will appeal as a backup body to all those folks who buy the M9. </p>

 

[fred_c1]

<p>Yep, a backup body needs to have the same red dot, especially when it doesn't take the main body's lenses.</p>

[carbon_dragon]

<p>It WOULD appeal as a backup body if it had a M lens mount.</p>

[Rob F.]

<p>It would be a backup body to the M9 <em>if </em>it had an M mount.</p>

[nee_sung]

<blockquote>

<p>if lens quality is the limiting factor in your photography, then you are amongst the words elite, the creme of the crop which most people are not close to.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Well that certainly wakes me up!</p>

<p>But then why should I be in Leica at all?</p>

<p>May be I should sell all my Leica gear. (??)</p>

[carbon_dragon]

<p>Well I could answer that two ways. First, I used M2s for years because they were small, elegant, and it had great lenses (which were also reasonably compact and easy to carry). Second, since the age of digital, I haven't really picked up my M2s because digital is just too convenient and I don't feel I sacrifice that much by using a DSLR. I would still like to be using a digital M of some kind and I'm still willing to pay for it, but so far I haven't been able to afford it -- or perhaps justify it. I'm toying with the idea of a used M8 but the cost is about the same as a brand new Canon 5D mk II and I'm concerned about maintenance issues with the M8 that won't be in warranty with a used one.</p>

<p>If it weren't for the price, I'd be willing to live within the limitations of the Leica digitals, so your own decision depends on your wallet and your commitment.</p>

[davebell]

<p>Nee Sung - lets face it, obviously lens choice is not irrelevant so please don't get carried away. A slow, poorly built lens versus a high quality wide aperture lens only has one winner and it is the latter. Maybe I should have qualified my comment a little better. What I am saying is that a lens with a much wider max aperture (F1.7 vs F2.8), giving a similar field of view to that on the X1 and thus far seemingly getting very positive reviews, must be pretty good and in no way inferior in terms of overall aesthetics of the final photograph which in my opinion is heavily comprised of subject/composition, lighting and timing versus purely the pixel peeping quality the lens is capable of. In my opinion, in terms of comparing the GF-1 with its 20mm lens to the X1, the Panasonic lens should be more than adequate to satisfy the aesthetics, i.e. produce a very good photograph. The biggest limitation is the person in control!</p>

[john_gellings]

<p><em>"</em><a href="../photodb/user?user_id=1869641"><em>Jack Palmer</em></a><em> </em><a href="../member-status-icons"></a><em>, Dec 16, 2009; 09:00 a.m.</em></p>

 

<p><em>I don't see how the X1 can survive. A large sensor ,fixed ,slow lens,P&S with Leica Red dot. What are these people at Leica thinking? $2000.00 buys a lot of digital camera today and this is light years away from what Leica needs to survive. The L should stand for loser on this one."</em><br>

<strong>$2000 does not buy a small digital camera with the same size sensor that includes a legitimate Leica lens designed in a classic manner with classic controls. It is a unique camera that certianly will do well.</strong> </p>

 

[ravi_nagpal]

<p>Is a simple OPTICAL viewfinder (does not have to be rangefinder) that hard to do in 2010???? Cheap 35mm P&S used to have them.. I will agree with David though.. It is "so close". For me the laundry list for the " Leica X2" would be:<br>

1) Nice clear large optical viewfinder would be it. With a fixed lens, assuming a photographer understands parallax error, it should not be an issue. <br>

2)Maybe they will go crazy and decide to put a Yashica T4 style simple, additional waistlevel finder<br>

3) For my taste, a little longer lens.. a 28/2 ( 42mm equivalent )would be perfect here. I loved the 45/2 contax 35mm perspective as well as the miniliux 40mm in its day. It is my favorite focal length next to 50mm (35mm equiv)<br>

If they do item 1 above, I may buy it.<br>

If they do item 1 & 3, I will definitely buy it.<br>

If they do item 1, 2 &3... I will be on a transatlantic flight to Solms, Germany as soon as it is announced and camp outside the headquarters and beat on their doors until they sell me one to get rid of me.</p>

[steve_nolan]

<p>Having owned film M's for years and 2 different M8's, I now have the GF1 w/20mm f1.7. I have to say that it will be tough to beat the great IQ, AF speed and general great handling of the GF1. I am still quite intrigued by the X1's ability to shoot at very high ISO's. Some of the pics I have seen online at 3200 have been very impressive. That being said I can't see the X1 being worth $2k, particularly in light of the slow AF that has been reported. I will wait and see as more US users get their hands on it and report back and hopefully for a firmware update.</p>