My full review of the new X2 is up!

Started May 11, 2012 | Discussions thread
Ming Thein
Senior MemberPosts: 1,916Gear list
Like?
Re: Agree, it's a tough playing field.
In reply to snake_b, May 11, 2012

Firstly, notice that I haven't disagreed with any of your points. Yes, the LCD is not what you'd expect for a 2012 camera - and I did point that out.

Secondly, a tool is a tool. I don't care what camera it is, if it does the job I'll use it. If it doesn't, I won't. Simple as that. I use an OM-D. I don't know how that is biased pro-Leica.

Thirdly, Fuji have proven again and again with the X100, X10 and X-Pro that a) their firmware and usability is terrible; and b) focusing is slow. Image quality is mostly excellent - but remember the white orb issue with the X10. So they're not infallible either.

No piece of equipment is perfect, and I'd never claim that.

snake_b wrote:

Personally, I'd rather wait until someone unbiased comes along and gives real feedback of the comparative type.

I'm not a huge x100, though I considered getting one, but no matter what you say, even if the performance is good, the X2 clearly displays cost-cutting and lack of vision.

I'll bet my life that an X200 will, without a doubt, kill the X2 in performance and features, as they don't have that far to go. Not to mention, Fuji has been using better screens for over a half-decade now.

Ming Thein wrote:

I owned an X100, bought with my own money, and whilst image quality was mostly good - there were a lot of gotchas with the user experience that made it more frustrating than pleasant to use. I sold it.

I don't think the X100 gives better image quality than the X2 - the X2 is honestly up at the top of the APS-C heap, and runs very close to the D7000. The X100's lens also has odd internal veiling flare wide open that robs sharpness a little, so if you want to match sharpness you have to go down to 2.8 anyway. Big differences are price and the presence of an internal EVF, which are definitely helpful. AF speed is slower, though.

For what it's worth, I have as much access as I want to the X1/X2. I even owned an X1 before I had any relationship with Leica, and sold it precisely because it was too slow - but the image quality was great. My pick of the mirrorless bunch now is the OM-D, and that's what I bought.

snake_b wrote:

Very nice photos.

We have new considerations in the field now and it seems underwhelming for Leica to seemingly cut massive corners, particularly the screen and lens. These are two areas that needed improvement as well.

It's gotten ludicrous, actually, how far behind Leica is with every new model, and on an increasing basis.

The question we have here is if the X100, despite fewer MP will still perform better, not to mention its replacement.

Even questions of the ugly old Canon G1X are thrown into the mix, as is the Pentax K-01 with various lenses and even price-wise, if one would simply just want to get an X-Pro-1. Even u4/3 comes up, with the fast pancakes from Panasonic. Even the price drags Sony's Nex series into it.

Leica fans will argue such things as "the Leica experience", "the red dot of quality", "unmatched IQ and Leicaness", but in reality, the IQ and characteristics can be easily duplicated between cameras.

Honestly, since the lens isn't even fast, I'd love to see it go up against the G1x. I have a feeling Leica might win only on the adjectives about it being a Leica.

-- hide signature --

Leica Camera brand ambassador and NPS member.
Portfolio and photographic musings at http://www.blog.mingthein.com

-- hide signature --

Leica Camera brand ambassador and NPS member.
Portfolio and photographic musings at http://www.blog.mingthein.com

 Ming Thein's gear list:Ming Thein's gear list
Ricoh GR Digital III Leica D-LUX 5 Nikon D700 Nikon D3X Leica S2 +20 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow