X100v lens vs Zeiss and Leica observation - I am stunned

lou Capeloto said:

Interesting I have used Leica for years and Leica digital me 240 which I have does a great job but the Fuji x100v is a better street camera

The pictures from the Leica I great if you have time but it is a slow and time consuming camera

What often made me ill were these Leica crazy people who drank the kool aide and not realistic but what a camera can do

I have over 25 old Leica's which I collected over the years and love the craftsmanship of the camera

That being said let's get real. I put canon, zeiss, leica glass on my Leica and Fuji xt20 and the old canon f4/100m is as good.

It is not about what the name is but what a lens or camera does

This Fuji x100v for me have become my favorite camera of all time

Unbelievable, and if someone like the Leica q they should buy it, would they pay the same amount of money if the camera said Panasonic and it was exactly the same I doubt it

Politically, I like people that are real and honest and say what they do and not con the people.

I am sure you know where I stand

Have a great day Terry

Click to expand...

Spoken by a wise man, it is about the camera for sure but do not forget the person behind the camera.

Your analogy about a Panasonic Q could not be more true. They would struggle to sell them for half that price. lol

--

-Terry
https://you pic.com/photographer/TerryRStahly/?mode=best

You have stated you don't care, but I can't see how ripping on forum users of another brand is remotely relevant. Seems pretty ironic to launch into a tirade about them, while criticizing the Leica users' behavior on their own forum.

Plenty of interesting stuff to talk about wrt the X100V. I'll post some pics when I get a chance.

Marek M said:

lou Capeloto said:

Unbelievable, and if someone like the Leica q they should buy it, would they pay the same amount of money if the camera said Panasonic and it was exactly the same I doubt it

Click to expand...

That is a perfect summary .

It is not only the results that expensive toys give, it is a membership in a limited club of people who can afford it.

Same way Leica owners are not automatically better photographers , Bentley drivers are not automatically better drivers. But both Leica and Bentley owners BELONG.

Click to expand...

whatever gets you through the night

If you want to have a detailed discussion about Leica and its value proposition, there’s a forum for that (and this ain’t it). I’m fine with comparisons, as long as they relate to Fuji gear, which is the charter of this particular forum.

So, if you want to argue about whether the investment in a Leica system (or any other brand) is justifiable, then please take it to that forum. Let’s keep this one focused on Fuji brand cameras, please. This thread is starting to wander well OT IMHO and I’d rather avoid locking it.

Thank you.

--
Jerry-Astro
Fujifilm X Forum Co-Mod

surfoxy said:

You have stated you don't care, but I can't see how ripping on forum users of another brand is remotely relevant. Seems pretty ironic to launch into a tirade about them, while criticizing the Leica users' behavior on their own forum.

Plenty of interesting stuff to talk about wrt the X100V. I'll post some pics when I get a chance.

Click to expand...

I am very interested in what others (not just 3 people debating 3 images or which 23mm lens is best) as most owners of the X100V or prospective owners are solar. Looking forward to more input on this camera I am pleaseantly surprised by mine so far.

As fas as the Leica folks that was more poking fun and meant to be good natured, they know they are a different breed of cat and I think they they pride themselves in that at the same time. Rest assured I am sure they talk amongst themselves about us pixel peepers too.

It was meant in good spirit which is often lost when it comes to typed words by strangers.

We all share the same passion which is all that counts.

Jerry-astro said:

If you want to have a detailed discussion about Leica and its value proposition, there’s a forum for that (and this ain’t it). I’m fine with comparisons, as long as they relate to Fuji gear, which is the charter of this particular forum.

So, if you want to argue about whether the investment in a Leica system (or any other brand) is justifiable, then please take it to that forum. Let’s keep this one focused on Fuji brand cameras, please. This thread is starting to wander well OT IMHO and I’d rather avoid locking it.

Thank you.

Click to expand...

100% agree when I see a topic I greatly prefer threads that pertain to the topic my time is valluable to me. Alas I am guilty of that as well at times.

terryreid said:

surfoxy said:

You have stated you don't care, but I can't see how ripping on forum users of another brand is remotely relevant. Seems pretty ironic to launch into a tirade about them, while criticizing the Leica users' behavior on their own forum.

Plenty of interesting stuff to talk about wrt the X100V. I'll post some pics when I get a chance.

Click to expand...

I am very interested in what others (not just 3 people debating 3 images or which 23mm lens is best) as most owners of the X100V or prospective owners are solar. Looking forward to more input on this camera I am pleaseantly surprised by mine so far.

As fas as the Leica folks that was more poking fun and meant to be good natured, they know they are a different breed of cat and I think they they pride themselves in that at the same time. Rest assured I am sure they talk amongst themselves about us pixel peepers too.

It was meant in good spirit which is often lost when it comes to typed words by strangers.

We all share the same passion which is all that counts.

Click to expand...

Well put, understood. Thanks Terry!

Leicalika said:

Marek M said:

lou Capeloto said:

Unbelievable, and if someone like the Leica q they should buy it, would they pay the same amount of money if the camera said Panasonic and it was exactly the same I doubt it

Click to expand...

That is a perfect summary .

It is not only the results that expensive toys give, it is a membership in a limited club of people who can afford it.

Same way Leica owners are not automatically better photographers , Bentley drivers are not automatically better drivers. But both Leica and Bentley owners BELONG.

Click to expand...

whatever gets you through the night

Click to expand...

Good example. He was the first class hypocrite, but wrote beautiful music.

I’m no expert, but I think the quality of the images my new x100v produces is really great! I’ve only had it a couple days, and admittedly haven’t figured it out entirely (first fujifilm camera) but after owning several cameras from other brands, this is the first that makes me grin when I get what I consider a great image! Just my two cents

This was a dark basement room with a small light.

--
“I’m Here, Because You’re There!”

I just got my X100V about a week ago and certainly am very, very pleased with the purchase.

My experiences on the topic is that so far, the X100V lens is very nice and certainly amazing for my photography.

However, when processing the images at home, and zoomed in, the X100V doesn't surprise me with its sharpness like the Ricoh GRIII or Leica M10+Zeiss 25mm F2.8 do.

But the sharpness of the Zeiss or GRIII, while I do enjoy admiring it from time to time when I do notice it, really doesn't matter for my prints, or posting and sharing photos.

Not all lenses on my M10-P are amazingly sharp. They often surprise me though for different reasons, like better giving the impression of being "3D".

The X100V (and X100F) lens never really surprised me in the same way. It's just generally really good, if a little "middle of the road, not too hot, not too cold", at least to me.

Well, the X100F lens surprised me for being soft close up wide open but that's well documented.

On usage -- there are many reasons why I'm enjoying shooting the X100V over the Leica M10-P right now, the biggest being new toy factor.

Long term, the X100V will be more useful as you can shoot it with the OVF/LCD/tilt LCD, while the M10, while it has live view, really is an OVF only camera.

But the M10 can shoot wider than 28mm, unlike the X100V+WCL, and the manual focus experience is just far more enjoyable. But it suffers from less depth of field, so, I guess I will continue to own all these cameras for the time being.

Quality of images ARE great, not IS great!

Q, my severe macaw is always a good test for me His white face has a lot of detail that looks great with the x100v



--
“I’m Here, Because You’re There!”

Schneidertime said:

Quality of images ARE great, not IS great!

Q, my severe macaw is always a good test for me His white face has a lot of detail that looks great with the x100v

Click to expand...

Great images and really interesting looking bird.

BTW, I realize this isn't the "English Forum" but you had it right the first time. "Quality is great" is the correct way to phrase it.

[fingers crossed that this won't start an OT debate on proper English usage]

--
Jerry-Astro
Fujifilm X Forum Co-Mod

KaanG said:

jxj said:

In the comparison I saw right here on this forum, the X100V was moderately sharper than the X100F wide open, and noticeably softer than the 23 f/2.

Click to expand...

The initial "independent" reviews showed some nice images. Now the device is out for sale, I don't see the same level of output quality from regular users doing normal pictures.

Yes the new lens is sharper wide open up close but who keeps shooting that kind of images is beyond me.

Anyways, I also would like to see the OP's claim supported by some examples. Without proof, we are just speculating.

To my eyes, the XF35f2 is better than the XF23f2 which is better than the X100V. So claiming that his is a great lens is an overstatement. The new V is a good product but it's not "that" good

Click to expand...

Who keeps shooting those kind of images is beyond you? Is it really that hard to imagine different people might have different usage patterns than yourself? I do a lot of low light food photography. Wide open up close is the name of the game for a lot of my photos.

lou Capeloto said:

As owner of the Leica Me 240 and zeiss 35mm f2.8 biogin, f2 35mm summicron, and voightlander 35mm f2.5 and Fuji x100f

I have come to the conclusion their is a zeiss look, Leica look etc

However, if you are looking for a sharp lens wide open the lens on the Fuji x100v is as sharp or sharper than those lenses mentioned

I shoot 90% of my photos on the street, came from the Leica IIIf and M3 however this is the best camera for shooting on the street I have ever used.

so if one is on the fence, it is a non brainer

one caveat I do not care about video

just one mans opinion wanted to share my thoughts

To everyone who has purchased this camera - enjoy

for those on the fence - you won’t be disappointed

Click to expand...

You have a very nice series of images on your 500px account!

I appreciate it. Thanks very much

jxj said:

In the comparison I saw right here on this forum, the X100V was moderately sharper than the X100F wide open, and noticeably softer than the 23 f/2.

Click to expand...

Have them both, (X100V, Xpro2 and 23/2.0) but in my personal experience it boils down to what you can do --and do- with them.

I also have a Leica M10 and Summicron 35/2 AND the CV Ultron 35/2 "Classic". If you go pixel peeping with suitable subjects and tripod, the Fujinon X 23/2.0 is indistinguishable from the one affixed to the X100V, while used on the X-Pro2; but then monted on the more modern X-T4 it is ¿what, brighter, sharper? No doubt it's due to the better sensor and processor of the newer T4.

On the Leica M10 (only FX digital I currently own) the Voigtländer Ultron 35 f/2.0 gives a sharper image corner to corner than my older Summicron 35 (2.0) v. IV, nicknamed "The King of Bokeh".
While the Deutsche Marks do give a tactile feel that is much better, I fail to notice where exactly this lens can be considered better than the Voigtländer. Do not overlook the fact that the ´Cron 35 IV is a 30 yo design while the Voigt is two, three years old at the most. With a full chromed brass built, it definitely feels much more substantial than the ole 'cron which is mainly aluminum.

This is only a pandemic forced comparo on the most equal grounds I could muster.

Right now, the old 35 'cron sits on the M10, the Voigtländer Ultron 35/2 on the exquisitely beautiful and nimble M2, and for my next sidewalk safari I'll surely pick the X100V as the most agile, practical and able platform to catch fleeting streetlife visions.

Forget sharpness... Beautiful images are blurry. ;-)


Captured near Coimbra with a Lumix LX100 (with Leica branded lens) two years ago in Portugal. Worked in Photoshop 2022.

Best,

Jorge.

--
Better gear not a better photographer makes.
https://www.facebook.com/jorgemtrevino/photos_albums

Corot2 said:

Maybe my copy maybe better than yours, it is quite outstanding and better than also my Fuji 35 f2 50 f2 and 27 f2.8 for sure IMHO

All is in the eyes of the beholder

Click to expand...

Hi, interesting debate. If it (I assume the X100V) is better than the lenses you cite and if it is in the eye of the beholder, could we have the opportunity to use our eyes by viewing some examples?

I had a X100V on loan last month; it was an excellent, fun camera and it delivered excellent IQ. I really liked the digital zoom to give an equivalent of 50mm and 70mm, where I could not detect any impact on IQ. With the WCL II one would have the flex of 28mm, 35, 50 and 70 in a small package.

However, I have a XE4 so I returned it as I preferred my XE4 with either the 23/f2 (and the flex of having a 16/f2.8 and 50/f2) and 27/f2.8. That said, I accept that a short loan may not have done the X100V justice.

Corot2 said:

I have come to the conclusion their is a zeiss look, Leica look etc

Click to expand...

.. and of course there is then a Fuji look, because if it wouldn't exist by itself, it would be either a Zeiss or Leica. The debate on it is a logical circle (or perhaps better a down spiral) no-one can find out.

KaanG said:

lou Capeloto said:

Maybe my copy maybe better than yours, it is quite outstanding and better than also my Fuji 35 f2 50 f2 and 27 f2.8 for sure IMHO

All is in the eyes of the beholder

Click to expand...

The XF35 f2 to me is the benchmark for primes. I've used this lens exclusively for a year and know the rendering and operation by heart.

So i would love to see a comparison between the X100 and this lens and would be more than happy to see that X100 produces nicer images.

Click to expand...

I never managed to get sharp corners at infinity with my 35/2, even at F8. That's my second sample, the first one was even worse. The rendering OTOH is very nice. Great everyday lens, except for landscapes.

My 27/2.8 is perfectly sharp into the extreme corners. I would call my 27/2.8 sample call a perfect lens, same for my 50/2. The 35/2 is the weakest of them regarding corner sharpness.

Jerry-astro said:

Sherman90 said:

Let’s not get carried away. The 100v is a fine camera (which I own) but it does not render, and nor is it as sharp as, Zeiss or Leica glass. Having handled all systems no amount of juxtaposed scenes from different times and places can convince me otherwise. The Summicron 35 is especially remarkable.

Click to expand...

Nice opinion. Not that I disbelieve you, but can you at least support it with some examples? If not, well, then it's just another unsubstantiated, strong opinion swimming in a sea chock full of personal opinions. A few examples might also be very helpful to others who are pondering which system to adopt.

C'mon... let's see the meat. BTW, I own Zeiss glass (Touit 12), so I'm not without a bit of experience with this. While it's a fantastic lens, I'm not quite seeing the magic that you imply here.

Click to expand...

I think at it's price point Leica has a better quality control.

It's not that hard to computer design terrific lenses today, but producing them at a constant high quality level is expensive.
The days of geniuses like Barnak and Mandler are long gone, today it's all CAD.

Just my 2 cent. I have a few of these old jewels, like Summicron 50, Leica M 90/2.8 thin Elmarit, ContaxG 45 (Zeiss Planar 45/2). But the newer cheaper lenses from Fuji, Nikon Z etc. are often as good or better (than the older ones) when you get a good sample.

For those who want to dive a little bit in the old Leica world, Erwin Puts Leica compendium (older version) Leica M-Lenses their soul and secrets can be downloaded for free from Overgaards website (his website has tons of information about Leica).

But Fuji does not have to hide.

https://www.overgaard.dk/pdf/Leica-M-Lenses-Their-Soul-and-Secrets_en.pdf

The new Sigma 18-50mm F2.8 DC DN (for Sony) is a good example what's possible to design today for around $549 USD. I hope Sigma will bring out a Fuji version of this lens.
https://dustinabbott.net/2021/10/sigma-18-50mm-f2-8-dc-dn-review/

I did not want to hijack the thread, but wanted to point out, whats possible with modern lens design, at a reasonable price point.


One better than the other, often depends on sample variations.