Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2016/03/11

[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: pdzwig at summaventures.com (Peter Dzwig)
Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2016 23:40:41 +0000
References: <56E1CF91.2020606@summaventures.com> <56E2321A.7060107@lighttube.net>

Thanks Jim,

Peter

On 11/03/2016 02:48, Jim Nichols wrote:
> 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
>>
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information

-- 

===========================================================
Dr Peter Dzwig                          



In reply to: Message from pdzwig at summaventures.com (Peter Dzwig) ([Leica] Leica and Fuji or Fuji and Leica - a sort of review)
Message from jhnichols at lighttube.net (Jim Nichols) ([Leica] Leica and Fuji or Fuji and Leica - a sort of review)