Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2013/05/19
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Thanks, Peter. A very reasoned and coherent response and one I will take into consideration. I appreciate your opinion!!! Tina On Sun, May 19, 2013 at 8:19 PM, Peter Klein <pklein at threshinc.com> wrote: > You're welcome, Tina. Part of writing this was to "think out loud" for > myself, too. Your key phrase here is "for my Leica M lenses." The Fuji > X-Pro1 is a wonderful camera, and we've seen wonderful work out of it in > the hands of people like B.D. Colen, Howard Cummer and Gerry Walden. > > I'm in a bit of a quandry with the larger issue myself. I've got some > wonderful Leica and Leica-mount lenses. But the OM-D is better at ISO 1600 > than my M8 is at 640. Mix-and-match between the other camera and Leica > lenses is only good in special cases like the theater, concert hall, macro > or static-subject telephoto. On the other hand, the Fuji and the OM-D are > giving Leica quality a run for its money with their native lenses. > > The ability to do mix-and-match Leica lenses with somebody else's body > puts the emphasis on the things you might do sometimes, not what you'll do > most of the time. I've got no regrets buying into micro 4/3, but I have to > accept that it is what it is, not what I'd like it to be. There is still > nothing like a skilled photographer with an RF and a window finder for > decisive moment work. > > So for the kind of people photography that you, I and many of us like to > do, Leica M still wins--if there's enough light. So my now-ancient M8 is > often still my camera of choice. I love the 35/1.4 ASPH as a > 47mm-equivalent normal lens, but I do wish I could use my 50mm lenses as > 50mm lenses. For that reason, I might upgrade to an M9 when the price goes > down a bit more. But I also realize that the M9 won't be much of a high-ISO > improvement. So there's a good chance I'll be an M-240 customer eventually. > God help me and my wallet. :-) > > --Peter > > > > > Thanks for your very reasoned review. Those are exactly the reasons I > > would hesitate buying the Fuji just for my Leica M lenses. I HATE EVF > and > > shutter delay! I think I will wait. Leica seems to be working on any > > problems and I have every confidence that they will fix them before they > > resume sending out cameras. I'd love to have the M240 tomorrow but I'm > > willing to wait for perfection. > > > > Tina > > > > > > On Sun, May 19, 2013 at 5:16 PM, Peter Klein <pklein at threshinc.com> > wrote: > > > > > I looked seriously at the X-Pro1 some time ago. I wanted a replacement > > > for my aging Panny G1, which was my "other than Leica" camera. > > > > > > I liked the feel of the X-Pro1, the discrete control buttons, the image > > > quality, especially at high ISO (as seen in other's pictures). I was > put > > > off by the autofocus slowness and problems with RAW support (now > somewhat > > > mitigated by firmware and RAW processor upgrades), and the lack of > diopter > > > adjustment in the viewfinder. Eventually micro 4/3 won out. I already > had a > > > couple of lenses, so the cost to upgrade to the Olympus OM-D E-M5 was > less. > > > The high-ISO image quality was slightly less than the Fuji, but quite > > > usable. (I've since grown to love the B&W conversions I'm getting out > of > > > the OM-D at ISO 1600). > > > > > > My one real disappointment with the OM-D is that it is not a decisive > > > moment camera for fleeting expressions. (I suspect the same holds for > the > > > XE-1) There is a bit of delay between what happens in life and when > you see > > > it in the viewfinder. And, there is a little-known issue in micro-4/3 > > > called Shutter Shock, which prevents you from getting the sharpest > pictures > > > at the most-used shutter speeds unless you program in an additional 1/8 > > > second shutter delay. > > > > > > Viewfinder delay is the Achilles heel of all EVF cameras. Add the > delay in > > > focusing a manual focus lens, and you get a combination that is fine > for > > > posed and static subjects, but not for action. > > > > > > I've done much playing around with manual lenses (both Leica and OM) on > > > DSLR and micro-4/3 bodies. For telephoto and macro, it's fine. For the > > > theater or classical music concerts where the performers don't move > around > > > much, it's quite usable. I did well with a 90 Summicron on the OM-D, > > > acting as a 180mm f/2. But the native lenses are just much more > convenient > > > and faster to work with. For anything that moves, you want the native > > > lenses. Not to mention that they were designed with the camera format > and > > > sensor in mind. And that Leica wide-angle lenses on anything but a > Leica > > > are always going to be a problem due to the steep angle of light > hitting > > > the sensor. > > > > > > This is why, if I were to get a Fuji, I would get the X-Pro1. It gives > you > > > EVF when you need precise framing and can deal with slow manual focus, > but > > > an optical viewfinder when you are dealing with anything moving. And I > > > would certainly get the Fuji lenses, just as I got the micro-4/3 > primes. > > > > > > B&W conversions from the OM-D: > > > <http://www.flickr.com/photos/****24844563<http://www.flickr.com/photos/**24844563>at > > > N04/8739819257/**lightbox<http**://www.flickr.com/photos/**24844563<http://www.flickr.com/photos/24844563>at > > > > N04/8739819257/lightbox>>, > > > and the next 3 "Older" > > > and this one: > > > <http://www.flickr.com/photos/****24844563<http://www.flickr.com/photos/**24844563>at > > > N04/8656429757/** > > > lightbox > > > <http://www.flickr.com/photos/**24844563<http://www.flickr.com/photos/24844563>at > > > > N04/8656429757/lightbox>> > > > > > > 90 Summicron on OM-D in a concert hall: > > > <http://www.flickr.com/photos/****24844563<http://www.flickr.com/photos/**24844563>at > > > N04/8590916253/**lightbox/<htt**p://www.flickr.com/photos/**24844563<http://www.flickr.com/photos/24844563>at > > > > N04/8590916253/lightbox/>> > > > and then next 2 "Older" > > > > > > The best I could do with my cousins' relatively slow tennis game. And > this > > > the best of about 30 tries, with the shutter shock delay turned *off*, > and > > > keeping my non-viewfinder eye open to watch the ball, and and hitting > the > > > shutter when the ball crossed the net. Using the EVF, the ball was > almost > > > never even in the frame. > > > <http://gallery.leica-users.****org/v/pklein/family/gladys80/**** > > > P4150047.jpg.html<http://**gallery.leica-users.org/v/** > pklein/family/gladys80/**P4150047.jpg.html<http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/pklein/family/gladys80/P4150047.jpg.html> > > > > > > > > > > > > > I suspect you'd get similar results from an EVF-only XE-1. > > > > > > --Peter > > > > > > > > > > Steve sorry if you have posted this before and I missed the > information. > > > I'm > > > > trying to decide between the x pro 1 to use with their 18-55 and one > > > other > > > > lens for now, maybe the 35 1.4. > > > > As well as as my Leica glass with the Fuji adapter. > > > > Or the XE-1. > > > > I'm having a hard time making a decision for some reason on which > body. > > > Have > > > > you both or have you used both that you can provide your thoughts? > > > > Thanks very much, > > > > And Nathan what model did you order? > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > > > Scott > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ______________________________****_________________ > > > Leica Users Group. > > > See > > > http://leica-users.org/****mailman/listinfo/lug<http://leica-users.org/**mailman/listinfo/lug> > <http://**leica-users.org/mailman/**listinfo/lug<http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug> > >for > > > > more information > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Tina Manley, ASMP > > www.tinamanley.com > > > > > ______________________________**_________________ > Leica Users Group. > See > http://leica-users.org/**mailman/listinfo/lug<http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug>for > more information > > -- Tina Manley, ASMP www.tinamanley.com