nboyer: Wow, this write-up has certainly brought all of the Leica haters out of the woodwork. I'm still scratching my head wondering why DPR would loan this camera to professional dSLR shooters. I'm betting, if they had put the camera into the hands of a professional photographer who is used to shooting a rangefinder, or familiar with Leica products, the results would have been quite different. Seems anyone can be called a professional these days. I've seen amateurs produce better results than some of the so-called professionals.
Wolfgang - Perhaps, you are not familiar with shooting a rangefinder, I am. Pay attention and read carefully, I did not say the X Typ 113 was a rangefinder, what I did elude to was that someone who shoots a rangefinder tends to take their time and think through the process and art of shooting. You can't always rely on Program mode. It' looks like they did not bother to understand that you can control the tone curve by moving away from the camera defaults and if you're going to use center-weight average metering you may very well blow the highlights. Any camera has only a finite dynamic range. I don't think that Leica ever intended that their cameras replace a dSLR. It is made for a certain type of user. If it doesn't fit your style, just move on. There are no shortages of camera manufacturers.
tom1234567: There are better cameras on the market and a lot cheaper tooI hate these rip of companies. and Leica is the biggest rip of goingrebadging cameras then double the price plus.some people need to be educated!!!!!!!
Seems you need to be educated. Firstly, the X (Typ 113) is not a rebadge, do your homework. Secondly, even a Leica rebadge made by Panasonic is not twice the price, again do your homework. Seems you have an ax to grind.
Wow, this write-up has certainly brought all of the Leica haters out of the woodwork. I'm still scratching my head wondering why DPR would loan this camera to professional dSLR shooters. I'm betting, if they had put the camera into the hands of a professional photographer who is used to shooting a rangefinder, or familiar with Leica products, the results would have been quite different. Seems anyone can be called a professional these days. I've seen amateurs produce better results than some of the so-called professionals.
Vetteran: BTW, the first two images are the worst images I've seen taken with the X113 since its release. These are really bad images and I'm surprised that this working pro can't get a properly exposed image when most others could and did. Really shocking.
The second photographer's images are in keeping with dpreview's penchant for testing cameras by taking photos of ridiculous inanimate objects that an iPhone could render well. What's up with that?
If you want to test a Leica like this, shoot people and/or do some street photography. That's a stress test worth talking about. It will also be a good test to see if these photographers are up to the task. That's hard photography which challenges the camera and the photographer.
Yes, and the first reviewer complains about blown highlights and fast moving subjects. If you look at his website, most of his pictures are posed static images AND with blown BLOWN highlights. So whatever DSLR he is shooting with is not doing much better!
nboyer: I just bought the upgrade. It will not let me activate it. Server error. Big FAIL.
Thanks Olivier. I was able to finally register.
I just bought the upgrade. It will not let me activate it. Server error. Big FAIL.
bobbarber: Ilegal immigration can only be solved by social justice. As long as there are pronounced inequalities between the developed nations and the rest of the world, people will find a way to move towards the money.
I lived in South America for a while, and people paid coyotes (human traffickers) $7,000 -15,000 (often not cash, but the family home, etc.) to smuggle them north across the U.S. border. The journey involved extreme hardship, possibilities of abuse, and even death in the desert. Obviously the migrants would have preferred to wait in line at the U.S. embassy, even for months, and buy a plane ticket, if there had even remotely been a possibility of legally emigrating.
Illegal gangs are a symptom of the larger problem, which is social inequality. The richer countries have become an enormous gated community. The idea is to keep as much money as possible inside the gates, and fence everybody else out. Obviously the people outside the gates disagree with that model.
"We currently have a president who wants to give amnesty to over 16 million law breakers were were fortunate enough to be non citizens." Do you disagree? They are already here, do you think we can just pack all 16 million up and send them back? Who will pay for it? Is this humane? Would you rather not have these 16 million be legalized since they already live here and begin paying into the tax system? I know I would. -Norm
Excuuuzzz me!!! I never considered my x100 dead!
straylightrun: Big surprise. Next is Micro Four Thirds and eventually APS-C before FF becomes the standard in a few years.
After paying $1200 for the 2-zoom kit and a year later it's worth about $300, you're damn right I'm p1ssed.
A very weak showing. I has hoping for a pro m43 from Olympus. Sad indeed.
I don't know that I agree with the reviewer. Careful comparison of the RAW samples would show that the E-PL3 renders slightly more detail over the E-P3, just take a look at the details in the feathers between the two cameras. This is likely due to one or more of four things - thinner AA filter, less NR on the sensor, inconsistent settings in ACR, or sample variation. The differences are minimal, but, visually noticeable, at least to me.
... Image quality of the E-PL3 is identical to that of the E-P3 and you'll note that our comments in this regard match those of our recent Olympus E-P3 in-depth review.