Reading mode: Light Dark

Leica X1 = $2000 USD

Go to last post
Goood point: There really is a two-way ego thing that sometimes goes on when Leica M is the subject. There are those egos that have to have it just for the brand, having no clue how to use or appreciate the camera. But, then there are also those egos that find it necessary to knock Leicas as being too expensive and years behind the times. Some of that is true, but sometimes the motives for knocking Leica Ms relate to the fact that the "knocker" really wants one, can't afford it, and thus feels compelled to diss Leica.
 
Yes, the X1 definitely has lots going for it.
 
Firstly, no one said that Leica was about cheap. Leica is not about cheap, Leica is for the "Leica Man", as clearly explained by Ken Rockwell...

Secondly, in APS-C and this size of camera, there is only the Sigma DP, which is (very= slow in all respects as I hear. So the Leica X1 will likely be much better here.

As for whether one wants to pay the premium, for a fixed lens, well that's anyone's call. I am sure this will make a fairly decent and rugged travel camera. The innards are they Leica? Well the sensor is APS-C (Nikon) sized so could very well come from Sony right? The 11 AF there is more choice but why not Sony again. And face recognition, on a Leica?? So yes, one could argue, hey why pay so much when you can have the same sensor in a body with more functions and interchangeable lenses, for less money, from Sony (assuming it's Sony)? But a Sony is not a Leica. Now will 12mp be enough for tomorrow's world, maybe not but they're enough for large enlargements.

And for anyone who does not want to pay $2k for this but still would like a comparably sized camera with a comparably sized sensor, well, there is the GF1 or the EP1 - admittedly with a smaller sensor - and probably in the not too distant future there will be similar offerings from Canon / Nikon and why not also Sony (assuming Sony supplied not just the chip but also some of the innards).
 
M9 & X1: definitely for folks who need Rolex watches to tell time. :)
--
I like making pictures.
 
Same size as E-P1 but no IBIS, no IL, no video, low max. ISO. And smaller 2.7" LCD with same low resolution. Also no RAW (unless DNG = RAW?).

All for $1250 more? What's wrong with this math? Oh, excuse me, I forgot, it's a Leica. So substance doesn't really matter.

Who is the target audience? Those who care more for flashing brand exclusivity than today's accepted features.

I'll await test results and hopefully be pleasantly surprised. Until then, Leica failure to bend to the winds of progress makes them more and more irrelevant in today's market.

But then, there's always the $7000 M9 with its 2.5" LCD ready to save the day......
 
After looking the M9's sample, I am totally disappointed. I assume that the X1 produces no better IQ than M9, I would say Leica is out of control. I can't see the merit of M9's FF, even with the legency Leica lens. Why should I pay such a high price for that coca mark? Grab a 5D2 and 50mm F1.2 L can finish everything, with half of M9's price.

The 2000-X1 is completely nonsenese, as a matter of fact, I start thinking that DP2 is quite a bargain with better IQ, as well as E-P1 and GF1.
--
Xsi(450D), F50fd, F30fd
http://www.flickr.com/norbelthomas
 
I am always so curious who is buing the leica gear... I mean I recognize that some things are better made than others - but it is not like we are comparing Leica to a Vivitar or Polaroid.

It is also not as if Leica was a custom shop with a year of waiting period - it is pretty much a mass producer so I think some people were really coned into paying top bucks for what is essentially a mass producer.
 
Have a look at the production line

http://www.dpreview.com/articles/leicafactory2009/

What is your definition of mass produced?
LaFonte said:
I am always so curious who is buing the leica gear... I mean I recognize that some things are better made than others - but it is not like we are comparing Leica to a Vivitar or Polaroid.

It is also not as if Leica was a custom shop with a year of waiting period - it is pretty much a mass producer so I think some people were really coned into paying top bucks for what is essentially a mass producer.
Click to expand...
--
terry
http://tbanet.zenfolio.com/
 
Apparently, according to Sean Reid, "the X1 was designed by Leica but is manufactured in Japan, though not by Leica's partner Panasonic." So the X1 is not handcrafted in a factory in Germany - not that that makes any difference - but not what a casual glance at the text on the back of the camera would imply: "Leica Camera Germany."

It's certainly an attractive and probably well made camera. Its overall image quality will likely be somewhat better than from competing mFT models with their smaller sensors.

If money was no object, I'd consider buying one. But it is. If I had that kind of money to spend on an X1, it would make more sense to get a GF1 + 20/1.7 kit and a Leica 45/2.8 macro. That way I'm investing most of my money in lenses which can be used long after the body has become obsolete.....and I'd still feel the pride that comes with owning a prestigious Leica product :-)
--
Björn

galleries: http://www.pbase.com/viztyger

 
Im sure the QA standards for the X1 will be higher than your typical $50 Walmart special. Actually, the X1 being made in Japan is a good thing, they know how to make these types of Cameras.
viztyger said:
Apparently, according to Sean Reid, "the X1 was designed by Leica but is manufactured in Japan, though not by Leica's partner Panasonic." So the X1 is not handcrafted in a factory in Germany - not that that makes any difference - but not what a casual glance at the text on the back of the camera would imply: "Leica Camera Germany."

It's certainly an attractive and probably well made camera. Its overall image quality will likely be somewhat better than from competing mFT models with their smaller sensors.

If money was no object, I'd consider buying one. But it is. If I had that kind of money to spend on an X1, it would make more sense to get a GF1 + 20/1.7 kit and a Leica 45/2.8 macro. That way I'm investing most of my money in lenses which can be used long after the body has become obsolete.....and I'd still feel the pride that comes with owning a prestigious Leica product :-)
--
Björn

galleries: http://www.pbase.com/viztyger

Click to expand...
 
I saw that when I read Sean's piece. It is a bit at odds with the remarks made yesterday at the Leica webcast. This inconsistency has come up in a couple of different threads at different sites. I guess we will know for sure when it ships in December.
--
terry
http://tbanet.zenfolio.com/
 
Hi Terry. I didn't know that Sean's remarks contradicted other statements. I guess we will have to wait and see.

It seems quite plausible however, that Leica had some help in both technical and manufacturing aspects. After all, if major camera manufacturers are struggling to provide fast contrast detect AF with large sensor cameras, then I wonder if Leica would have a chance of getting it right on their first try (supposing they did).
TEBnewyork said:
I saw that when I read Sean's piece. It is a bit at odds with the remarks made yesterday at the Leica webcast. This inconsistency has come up in a couple of different threads at different sites. I guess we will know for sure when it ships in December.
--
terry
http://tbanet.zenfolio.com/
Click to expand...
--
Björn

galleries: http://www.pbase.com/viztyger

 
... simply because it's based entirely on opinion, perspective, many things. It's relatively intangible, and no one has all the answers on any of it.

So what we're left with is own opinions, perspectives, and experice. In the Leica brand I saw a company with a long standing history of paying undevided attention to the needs of real photographers. They were a company who made working tools for the working photographer.

Now what do we have? According to you the M9 should be a statement of fashion and statous. Well, if that's the way they're going then we should soon be seeing gem incrusted shutter releases, etc. etc... though not really... as you seem to think the hand crafted technology in itself is the statous symbol. Likely this is true, but as I say, it's sad... what photographer should really care about these things.

Anyway the gripes come down to the sensor, and I'm not alone in this.
--
W.L. Clark Swimm
http://www.clarkswimm.com
 
Ouch. That's got to hurt if you are going to try and rip on this camera just for price. Let's not forget that that German made Leica lens will also most likely be better than the 17mm in the Oly stable.

Why even start this topic? It's Leica. They provide cameras for a niche in the market that has been around for ever. To be honest, they are amazing tools if you are interested in how they function or find that it lends to your creative process.

There is something magical about holding a Leica Rangefinder. I have shot with an M3 and M7 with various lenses and viewfinders, and have to say that there is certainly a magic quality to them. Their near silent operation. The lack of complex mechanical parts that result in unrivaled longevity. There is a reason that people are still shooting with M3's that have never been serviced and have their original cloth shutters and they work like the day they were made despite heavy use by multiple generations of users. The M9 will very seriously be an interesting tool to consider.

Leica's are not for all. If you are concerned about price, then they certainly are not for you...although this comparison showing that once you add the pancake to the E-P1 puts them right in the same range, and I bet that the Leica is smaller, lighter, and of course comes with some really amazing software...not to mention that Leica customer service is top notch, not to be compared to any Asian manufacturer.

If it isn't for you, then don't get it. If it is, get it and love it.

--
Wow...that's a pretty killer camera! Are you any good?

-Jake-
 
With the exception of noise at high iso, where it is as bad as 4/3 cameras, my M8 produces better image quality than any other camera I own or have access to except the Nikon D3x, which is gargantuan, as are its good lenses. The D3x is only comparable to just superior with a limited number of lenses, none of which are cheap.

For me this is fine since 400iso is very fast for me (I am used to film) and I have a DSLR for poor light conditions, where the IQ is less noticeable/masked.

I have a Panasonic G1 and have just sold a E-P1, these are fun to use and quite good on resolution, but not close to the Leica, even using Leica lenses where they only use 1/4 of the potential anyway.
Clarkey said:
no I've not used a Leica of any sort. I don't doubt the handling s superb and that is something of great value. Image quality though is a major consideration and this is where I'd argue the M9 falls short... by a long shot.
--
W.L. Clark Swimm
http://www.clarkswimm.com
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top