[Leica] Leica and Fuji or Fuji and Leica - a sort of review

[Peter Dzwig]

Dear All,

For quite a long time I have been toying with how to combine several things:
Digital; my existing Leica lenses and love of Leicas (and my other glass); image
quality; and above all flexibility when travelling - for which in large part
read compactness and weight.

When I just used my IIIf I had very lightweight kit; but the lack of good and
ready souping makes that untenable as working proposition in the long term. So
it had to be digital.

A few weeks ago, matters came to a head and I had to make a choice. In the frame
were the following: Leica Q, M9, MM, 246 etc., Fuji X-Pro2, X-E2/2S, XT. There
really weren't any other contestants.

So what happened? What did I decide? Before starting, I need to say that this is
a **subjective** viewpoint.

I consulted LUGgers, friends and colleagues on their views and came back with a
very mixed bag of results. There was no clear majority in favour of one solution
or other. All had their proponents. I looked at the reviews. Again all systems
were very good but lacking in one detail or another the real value of which
could only be determined by your particular needs.

For me the issues are (i) price; (ii) performance; (iii) usability and
compactness. I wanted to buy something that I can afford that will provide the
performance that I want/need and will fit snugly into whatever I am wearing or
carrying. This was pretty much the rationale for both my Leicas, particularly
the IIIf.

So what decision did I make? Ultimately I bought an XE-2. Why? I will explain,
but I am very much still a Leica fan and providing that I can get the souping
sorted will continue to use my M3 and IIIf.

First price: The only Leica I could realistically afford was either an Q or a
used M9. The newer ones are simply beyond my means at present or for the
forseeable future.

Q: I spent a lot of time looking at the Q and was particularly impressed by the
review Craig Mod gave it. While it has modern Leica glass, undoubtedly an
excellent thing, the lens is fixed so it's close up or nothing. My photography
needs flexibility.
 Further there is a horrendous waiting list, last time I enquired and I wanted
it yesterday.

Used M9: Even if I bought one with the sensor replaced, it is possible that
something similar will happen again, so probably too high a risk. For Leica to
have an issue of the magnitude of the M9 crazing problem is nothing short of
inexcusable. There should have been an instant recall and a fix with a
completely different sensor, but...

Ultimately Leica's excellence these days is as a manufacturer of lenses not
processors and s/w; so the question always remains whether or not they shouldn't
partner with someone to build their cameras - including chips - while they
concentrate on the lenses. They could probably deliver at a more competitive
price point. Put another way their corporate eye may not be on the ball. As for
tie-ups with Huawei...

The M9 and Q didn't really fit my bill although it came much closer than I may
seem to imply.

So I turned to Fuji: OK I already have an X-Pro1 which is an excellent camera
with high quality (read near Leica-quality) optics available. In addition I can
use my M and LTM lenses on it .

I didn't want the XPro-2 as although the sensor and processor are updates; it
really doesn't appear to offer obvious advantages to me.

XT - again fixed and I don't very much like its feel in the hand. I said this
was subjective!

X-E2: much more the right size, discrete in black, smaller than a Leica M and
feels more like an LTM Leica. The major difference between the X-E2 and the
X-E2S with the most up to date s/w on both is the silent electronic shutter on
the S. Not really important to me so I went for the X-E2.



I had to travel in a hurry, so took the X-E2 with the standard zoom that I
already had  (try getting a Tri-Elmar + camera as part of a package for under
£1500) and the 35mm f2.  I found it very compact and usable though having it for
precisely 12 hours before I left was a bit of a baptism of fire.

To cut a long story short I ended up in Arles in the Church of St. Trophime, one
of the oldest major churches in France and renowned for it's architecture, much
of which is Gothic.

Here are some examples of what the XE-2 gave me.

[All shots were taken in Auto mode with OIS (Optical Image Stabilisation) using
the Fuji 18-55 zoom. Light was overcast with some bright patches - occasionally!
There has been no colour treatment, these are scaled down TIFFs (to approx 10M)
made from the original 46M RAW files in PS, so that they fit in the gallery's
upload restrictions. All have a larger view available.]

Detail rendition is good:

Firstly St.Trophime himself in the cloister, flanked by St. Stephen and St. Peter.

http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/PeterDzwig/X-E2+test/St_Trophime-1_resized.tif.html
<http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/PeterDzwig/X-E2+test/St_Trophime-1_resized.tif.html>

Similarly the figure of the resurrected Christ, showing the stigmata (five
wounds), flanked by St John(?) and Elijah(?), under with somewhat more difficult
lighting conditions.

http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/PeterDzwig/X-E2+test/Christ_St_Trophime-1_resize.tif.html
<http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/PeterDzwig/X-E2+test/Christ_St_Trophime-1_resize.tif.html>

The world-renowned tympanum and details thereof:

http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/PeterDzwig/X-E2+test/St_Trophime_Tympanum-1_resized.tif.html

<http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/PeterDzwig/X-E2+test/St_Trophime_Tympanum-1_resized.tif.html>

and

http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/PeterDzwig/X-E2+test/St_Trophime_Doorway_left_resized.tif.html

<http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/PeterDzwig/X-E2+test/St_Trophime_Doorway_left_resized.tif.html>

Colour rendition is good (see photos above) even shooting against the light
through some modern stained glass:

http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/PeterDzwig/X-E2+test/Window_St_Trophime-resized.tif.html

<http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/PeterDzwig/X-E2+test/Window_St_Trophime-resized.tif.html>

Conclusions: As a package with the zoom I could shoot most things and I could
probably have done without the f2. It is a bit smaller than an M and lighter too.

Although it I found the viewfinder a little difficult to work with, I can deal
with it. I have issues with the bewildering variety of settings and controls,
but I have that with any digital camera

To my amazement I found that in the latest software there is a split screen
simulation mode, which works well even with a 35mm LTM Summaron mounted via an
LTM to M-adapter and then the Fuji M-adapter, although it needs some improvement.

Am I satisfied? Well, there is no feel quite like that of a Leica, but cost has
made them prohibitive for me. I must consider myself lucky as I already have a
1.25M+ s/no SS M3 which takes FILM! All I have to do is get the souping sorted.
This combination works for me at present and I can continue to use Leica and
Voigtlander (and in principle other manufacturer's) glass.

Your comments are welcome as ever, but I DO NOT want to get involved in a flame
war. My requirements are mine and may well not meet those of others.

Regards,

Peter