Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2016/03/10

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: [Leica] Leica and Fuji or Fuji and Leica - a sort of review
From: jhnichols at lighttube.net (Jim Nichols)
Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2016 20:48:58 -0600
References: <56E1CF91.2020606@summaventures.com>

Hi Peter,

I have been doing some of the same comparisons.  I have an X-E1, which 
does well for me.  From a price point, the X-Pro 1 is appealing, though 
the X-Pro 2 is tempting.

I agree with you on the feel and size of the X-E1 and X-E2 cameras. I 
started out many years ago with a Leica IIIa, and later, a IIIf, and the 
X-E series is very similar, in my opinion.  Congratulations on your 
choice.  The X-E2 should serve you well.

Jim Nichols
Tullahoma, TN USA

On 3/10/2016 1:48 PM, Peter Dzwig wrote:
> 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
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>



Replies: Reply from pdzwig at summaventures.com (Peter Dzwig) ([Leica] Leica and Fuji or Fuji and Leica - a sort of review)
In reply to: Message from pdzwig at summaventures.com (Peter Dzwig) ([Leica] Leica and Fuji or Fuji and Leica - a sort of review)