x100 - why I'm selling mine

[jonoslack]

Hi there
you may have seen it in the buy and sell.

I thought it might be worth explaining myself.

The reason I'm selling it is nothing to do with what it is, or what it does, it's simply that for the things I would use it for, I'm better off using my M9.

Simple as that.

It's not small enough to go in a pocket, for macro the K5 does a better job, for most of my nature, landscape and still life the M9 does a better job.

I really liked the camera - great fun to use, I even found most of the quirks endearing rather than irritating. The image quality was perfectly good, the macro mode fun to use. Even more enticing was all the fun of the forum, exchanging images and ideas with great people.

It was well worth £100 to spend a week or so playing with it.

But it's time to get back to what works best for me.

all the best

[OlliL]

Hi Jono,

I think many of us understand your decision, even though most of us don't have those alternatives.

If I was you, I'd do the same.
A rangefinder with a 35mm is nearly the same size and in the case of an M9 better when it comes to IQ. I would say that if you compare these two, which in your case makes sense, the X100 seems redundant (at least if you don't need AF).

The K5 gives you flexibility, you can't get from neither, so a comparison would be foolish.

Kind regards
Oliver

[glenerrolrd]

Ha Ha as predicted ! My exact feelings .

When I was in NYC with my 2 M9s and the x100 ..no way was I taking the x100 . This was serious shooting for me and to waste ? an opportunity for street shooting in order to test the latest and greatest ....seems like a judgement error . So I used it for one brief trip to Times Square.

I use a d7000 (similar spec to the K5) set up for fill flash with a GF diffuser and you can t beat it for the casual family shoots .

The advantages of the X100 for an M9 user ....higher ISO performance , small,lighter ,cheaper aren t enough . (Quite different if your main system is a DSLR or MF).

But ..rationale camera decisions are few and far between .

And the X100 is really nice and I am working on taking it everywhere (which I will not do with 2 M9 s just because I have to be too careful ).

[jonoslack]

HI Roger

Originally Posted by glenerrolrd

Ha Ha as predicted ! My exact feelings .

When I was in NYC with my 2 M9s and the x100 ..no way was I taking the x100 . This was serious shooting for me and to waste ? an opportunity for street shooting in order to test the latest and greatest ....seems like a judgement error . So I used it for one brief trip to Times Square.

I use a d7000 (similar spec to the K5) set up for fill flash with a GF diffuser and you can t beat it for the casual family shoots .

The advantages of the X100 for an M9 user ....higher ISO performance , small,lighter ,cheaper aren t enough . (Quite different if your main system is a DSLR or MF).

But ..rationale camera decisions are few and far between .

And the X100 is really nice and I am working on taking it everywhere (which I will not do with 2 M9 s just because I have to be too careful ).

I recently bit the bullet and insured my Leica kit (nothing else, just the leica stuff). So that really isn't so much of an issue.

If I'm going to take different cameras, then I'd rather have the K5 and one M9 with a spare lens or so - the X100 covers so much similar ground, but there's no space left for it between the K5 and the M9 . . . and if I really want something for my pocket I'd be better off with an S95!

The reason for selling it is that it's muddying the water - I spend all the time doing comparison shots!

[Bob]

If I had an M9 AND a k5 I might sell my x100 too, but I don't
-bob

[Terry]

Originally Posted by Bob

If I had an M9 AND a k5 I might sell my x100 too, but I don't
-bob

+1

This is my only camera with an optical viewfinder. My only other gear is MF tech camera (no viewfinder) and m4/3.

[glenerrolrd]

I ve gone thru the multiple system process a half dozen times. I ve always come back to my leica equipment and the M system in particular. So no argument here .

[wjlapier]

Totally understand.

I have the D7000 and I'm perfectly happy with it. If I had a M9 ( I will eventually ), I would also not keep the X100. I still like the GF1 and 20/1.7 combo and like the pics I get it. In fact, I still haven't taken a picture with the X100 yet. Too busy.

[Millsart]

I enjoyed my M9 a bit more than the X100 as well, and the overall IQ was indeed better as well (though the X100 at high ISO holds its own)

However, M9 and 35mm Cron, even at used priced is about a $8000 setup and given it was just a camera for personal enjoyment shooting, and not business, I couldn't really justify having such an investment as its pretty steep for a tool/toy I just like taking on walks around town etc.

X100, while again not cheap, at $1200 just made a ton more sense for my needs and still gives me much of the same enjoyment as my M9 did. No the files aren't quite as good (who doesn't love viewing m9 files at 100% and seeing that detail and clarity right?) but in terms of the overall shooting experience, its pretty much on the money.

I've got a small, lightweight camera, with a great lens, some nice analog controls and a very nice OVF, all with some classic styling. I find myself carrying it like the M9, shooting the same things and in the same manner as the M9, and being very happy with the overall IQ of the camera and given its 1/5th the cost, far easier to enjoy.

All things being equal I'd go M9 if money isn't an issue, but it is for me right now, so I'm really enjoying still getting the essence of Leica shooting on a budget.

[woodyspedden]

Originally Posted by jonoslack

HI Roger


I recently bit the bullet and insured my Leica kit (nothing else, just the leica stuff). So that really isn't so much of an issue.

If I'm going to take different cameras, then I'd rather have the K5 and one M9 with a spare lens or so - the X100 covers so much similar ground, but there's no space left for it between the K5 and the M9 . . . and if I really want something for my pocket I'd be better off with an S95!

The reason for selling it is that it's muddying the water - I spend all the time doing comparison shots!

No disagreement with your choice but insuring the M9 and lenses isn't the only issue. If your M9 and lenses are stolen, you may have to wait a year to get replacements! Anyway, that doesn't really have anything to do with the X100 but only with Leica continuing to be so slow in getting lenses to market after the M9 has been out there for two years!

Just my thoughts

Woody

[Millsart]

Insurance is obviously always a good idea for any high value equipment, and a separate policy is best as well, not under your homeowners etc.

That said, I think with the Leica's, there is still that issue of feeling like your holding a valuable jewel in your hands. Who wants to get some scratches etc on their camera ?

We can say they are just tools etc all we want, but at the same time, we know how expensive it is and I think most of us like to keep it nice because we want to keep our resale value up.

Buying a $7k camera isn't as bad when we feel we can get $6k out of it. Its not like that $7k is just gone, know what I mean.

But that does lead to a bit of babying perhaps, at least it did with me. X100 is at a price where Im not as worried. I don't abuse it of course, but its "just" a camera. Not the end of the world if its damaged while out shooting, or something I've got to worry about in the hotel safe etc

When I had the M9, it was still a camera, but was it "just" a camera ? My little shoulder bag with M9 and a couple of lenses was worth more than my car. Always was aware of that in the back of my mind.

All things are relative though of course, some folks have the money to own a backup M9, other people may feel a $1200 camera is a huge investment. No one is right or wrong.

For me at least, X100 really fit just right in what I could afford, what I could justify spending for the use I get out of it, and still gets me nearly all the same enjoyment shooting it as the M9.

To each his own, but I think it perfectly balances everything I want in everyway.

[dhsimmonds]

Originally Posted by jonoslack

Hi there
...............you may have seen it in the buy and sell.
I thought it might be worth explaining myself.
The reason I'm selling it is nothing to do with what it is, or what it does, it's simply that for the things I would use it for, I'm better off using my M9.
Simple as that..................

Well Jono, I gave you a month before you came to this decision, but I never dreamt that it would only be a week before you parted company!

This section of the forum will be all the poorer without you but I guess we can all tune in to the Leica section to see how you are doing!
Or the Sony section or Pentax sections, or even LUF?

[Sapphie]

Jono

Well, I don't have Leicas. All I can say is I love the X100 (after 3 days). I used to have a Mamiyas (a TLR and the '7' rangefinder) so I know what it is like to have quality equipment ... ignoring the 'value added idiot proof' stuff they have tried to add to the X100, using it as it was really intended is wonderful. I even like the OVF/EVF switch, youngsters won't even know that 'old timers' cameras had such a switch that was actually the self-timer.

It just *feels* so good and refreshing. On the other hand, no point having surplus equipment sitting there doing nothing and losing value.

Lee

P.S. Do you know ... and I don't remember seeing this mentioned elsewhere, one of the first things I took notice of was its screw-in manual cable release facility! Boy, I have to raid my boxes to see if I still have one! Probably no point with the built in self-timer mind you ...

[dhsimmonds]

Originally Posted by Sapphie

.................P.S. Do you know ... and I don't remember seeing this mentioned elsewhere, one of the first things I took notice of was its screw-in manual cable release facility! Boy, I have to raid my boxes to see if I still have one! Probably no point with the built in self-timer mind you ...

Funny that, I have a shoot lined up for tomorrow in Dorset and as some of it will be outside in late evening a tripod will almost certainly be needed and I shall be resurrecting my old screw-in cable release and really looking forward to it. Last time it was used was on a Pentacon 6!! My trusty Sony A900 will be with me as back up, but I am very confident that the X100 will handle it well.

[Sapphie]

Originally Posted by dhsimmonds

Funny that, I have a shoot lined up for tomorrow in Dorset and as some of it will be outside in late evening a tripod will almost certainly be needed and I shall be resurrecting my old screw-in cable release and really looking forward to it. Last time it was used was on a Pentacon 6!! My trusty Sony A900 will be with me as back up, but I am very confident that the X100 will handle it well.

Dave

LOL indeed!!! I think I last used one on a Pentax K1000. Oh dear.

You are using a Sony A900 as 'back up'??

I guess you will practice a bit with that cable release first but I hope the X100 performs well for you. Great stuff!

Lee

[jonoslack]

Lee, Dave
I have a Sony A900 as a backup too and that's going nowhere.

I understand the attraction of the X100 - like it myself - As for the lever - it changes the framelines on the M9 (not that it gets used much).

I went out for an hour with the dog and the M9 and a 50 f1.4 this evening, and it was like putting on a nice comfy and familiar pair of shoes.

all the best to both

[ptomsu]

Originally Posted by jonoslack

Hi there
you may have seen it in the buy and sell.

I thought it might be worth explaining myself.

The reason I'm selling it is nothing to do with what it is, or what it does, it's simply that for the things I would use it for, I'm better off using my M9.

Simple as that.

It's not small enough to go in a pocket, for macro the K5 does a better job, for most of my nature, landscape and still life the M9 does a better job.

I really liked the camera - great fun to use, I even found most of the quirks endearing rather than irritating. The image quality was perfectly good, the macro mode fun to use. Even more enticing was all the fun of the forum, exchanging images and ideas with great people.

It was well worth £100 to spend a week or so playing with it.

But it's time to get back to what works best for me.

all the best

Congratulations

right choice!

Peter

[The Smoking Camera]

I would love to have an M9, but such a huge $$ investment.
And I can just imagine going down that slippery $$ road of always wanting one more lens.
As quirky as the x100 may be, at least I know it gives me wonderful images day or night.
And as a closed system, there is no slippery $$ road for the fuji.
Well at least until the x200 is announced.
Thanks for your comments and I look forward to seeing your M9 images Jono.

[jonoslack]

Originally Posted by The Smoking Camera

I would love to have an M9, but such a huge $$ investment.
And I can just imagine going down that slippery $$ road of always wanting one more lens.
As quirky as the x100 may be, at least I know it gives me wonderful images day or night.
And as a closed system, there is no slippery $$ road for the fuji.
Well at least until the x200 is announced.
Thanks for your comments and I look forward to seeing your M9 images Jono.

Hi Joe
Well, I slipped down that road with an early M8, and I have all the lenses I want (after much trial and error). The advantage is that although the bodies do lose value, the lenses usually appreciate as long as you buy them carefully.

I've been shooting an M9 for almost 2 years now, so it does at least have the advantage of familiarity!

But still, nobody has bought my X100 yet!

On the other hand, Fuji seem to have started sending me emails!

[emr]

Originally Posted by jonoslack

On the other hand, Fuji seem to have started sending me emails!

What, they want it back?

[monza]

Originally Posted by woodyspedden

No disagreement with your choice but insuring the M9 and lenses isn't the only issue. If your M9 and lenses are stolen, you may have to wait a year to get replacements!

This is a very good point. M9s are not difficult to obtain now, but if you need to replace a 35 lux or 50 lux, or other particular lenses, best of luck...might have to settle for alternative optics for an extended period.

[Armanius]

Originally Posted by jonoslack

I recently bit the bullet and insured my Leica kit (nothing else, just the leica stuff). So that really isn't so much of an issue.

If I'm going to take different cameras, then I'd rather have the K5 and one M9 with a spare lens or so - the X100 covers so much similar ground, but there's no space left for it between the K5 and the M9 . . . and if I really want something for my pocket I'd be better off with an S95!

The reason for selling it is that it's muddying the water - I spend all the time doing comparison shots!

I also insured my M9 last year. Made me feel a whole lot better while using it!

Looks like our gear overlaps quite a lot - K5, M9, S95 (well S90 in my case) ... and for now, the X100 (until someone buys yours).

But I totally understand about muddying the waters. I'm trying to un-muddy them myself. So will likely sell some stuff off as well.

Will miss y'a in the Fuji forum!

[jonoslack]

Originally Posted by Armanius

I also insured my M9 last year. Made me feel a whole lot better while using it!

Looks like our gear overlaps quite a lot - K5, M9, S95 (well S90 in my case) ... and for now, the X100 (until someone buys yours).

But I totally understand about muddying the waters. I'm trying to un-muddy them myself. So will likely sell some stuff off as well.

Will miss y'a in the Fuji forum!

Well, the S95 belongs to Silas (some offspring of mine) I do have an A900 as well.

However, nobody seems to be buying my X100, so I might not be gone (well, if I've got it I might as well shoot it!).

I thought it despicable of you to post those bicycle shots though

[jonoslack]

Originally Posted by emr

What, they want it back?

I wish - no, they've been telling me that you shouldn't use manual focus in OVF mode, and . . . .well, basically they've just told me "It doesn't work like that" about all the problems.

Originally Posted by monza

This is a very good point. M9s are not difficult to obtain now, but if you need to replace a 35 lux or 50 lux, or other particular lenses, best of luck...might have to settle for alternative optics for an extended period.

Of course you're right - but that's not a reason not to be insured. If my .95 NOCT get's stolen/broken/lost, then I'll be sad, and I'll miss it until it's replaced, but it's a lot better that someone else is going to either pay for it or give me it's replacement value!

To be fair - the only camera gear I've ever had stolen was a minolta vectis from the back of a van in Rome in . . . . 1990? (life is full of small miracles). I'm not planning on it, but knowing that one is financially covered is helpful if you have a bag worth $50,000!

[Terry]

Originally Posted by jonoslack

To be fair - the only camera gear I've ever had stolen was a minolta vectis from the back of a van in Rome in . . . . 1990? (life is full of small miracles). I'm not planning on it, but knowing that one is financially covered is helpful if you have a bag worth $50,000!

And a very close call at a restaurant - where your persistence paid off.

[fotografz]

I think the thought here is that IF you have a M9 and know how to comfortably and creatively use it like Jono does, then what's the point?

He doesn't have to deal with the short supply of M lenses, he already has the lenses. He has now insured it, but he used it to good effect when it wasn't insured. It is no more precious than a $8K Canon or Nikon ... and a lot easier to hide

I have nothing against APSc sized sensor cameras ... I use a Black NEX5 with Leica M lenses on it ... fun, and I've gotten very fast at using the mag LCD to focus fast M lenses in very low light. I can use it as AF, or with a slew of M optics, or a slew of my Zeiss A900 lenses ... the point of it is that it is a teeny-tiny emergency back-up for both the M and Sony systems ... but not as good as either.

I think the X100 is cool. If it took other lenses it would be a real contender IMO.

-Marc

[woodyspedden]

Marc

You missed my point. I said that if his M9 and lenses were stolen, it is great to be covered financially but getting replacement lenses may take forever at the current state of Leica production. The fact that he already has lenses is wonderful but doesn't deal with what happens if they are stolen. Getting a 50Lux has now been a major dilemma for over a year and things don't seem to be getting better.

So my original thesis still stands. If you want or need your expensive Leica gear for any purpose, go for it. But for carrying around every day so that you always have a camera with you, an alternative like the K-5 which is 1/5th the cost of the body and of course immeasurably cheaper when it comes to lenses, seems sensible to me.

Just my thoughts

Woody

[fotografz]

Originally Posted by woodyspedden

Marc

You missed my point. I said that if his M9 and lenses were stolen, it is great to be covered financially but getting replacement lenses may take forever at the current state of Leica production. The fact that he already has lenses is wonderful but doesn't deal with what happens if they are stolen. Getting a 50Lux has now been a major dilemma for over a year and things don't seem to be getting better.

So my original thesis still stands. If you want or need your expensive Leica gear for any purpose, go for it. But for carrying around every day so that you always have a camera with you, an alternative like the K-5 which is 1/5th the cost of the body and of course immeasurably cheaper when it comes to lenses, seems sensible to me.

Just my thoughts

Woody

I understood the point Woody.

Not carrying the tool of preference out of fear is an odd concept to me.

IF it is stolen, and IF at that given unknown future time the replacements weren't available, and IF it had to be that specific equipment bar none ... is a lot of Ifs and maybes.

Why would I shoot with something less than my preference? I can always get the lesser tool IF something happens in the unknown future ... in the meantime I am shooting with what I prefer. The concept feels like you have already been mugged for your Leica while you still have it in your possession

-Marc

[The Smoking Camera]

Interesting discussion.
Much depends on whether one owns an M9.
Just out of curiosity and slightly off topic - what is a nice one, two and three kit lens for the M9?
Slippery road ahead.

[Paratom]

Originally Posted by The Smoking Camera

Interesting discussion.
Much depends on whether one owns an M9.
Just out of curiosity and slightly off topic - what is a nice one, two and three kit lens for the M9?
Slippery road ahead.

for me:
1 lens: 35mm
2 lens: 35 and 75 or 24 and 50
3 lens: 24,35,75 or 21/35/50

my most used lenses on the M9 are 50mm and then 35mm

[PeterA]

What is an X100?

[kuau]

I was thinking about getting a X100 to replace my X1, I have an M9 also, but.... for me I like the x1 still because of its size pocketable and I shot my X1 at F5.6 F8 only so I'm sticking with my X1

Steven

[ashwinrao1]

Steve, greetings....I find the X100 more pocketable than the M9, similar to the X1....IQ is different. You aren't wrong to stick with the X1....but the x100 is lovely....

[Paratom]

Originally Posted by kuau

I was thinking about getting a X100 to replace my X1, I have an M9 also, but.... for me I like the x1 still because of its size pocketable and I shot my X1 at F5.6 F8 only so I'm sticking with my X1

Steven

Thats what I finally decided. The Hybridviewfinder of the x100 seems very nice, but then I also find it considrably bigger in size, plus the x1 has a built in flash, plus I allready have the x1.
If I did not have the x1 allready I might have deicded different (because of hybrid VF and faster lens, but still I find the x100 on the boarder for a compact camera. Its more a small M9 than a big x1 IMO sizewise.

[dhsimmonds]

The X100 also has a built in flash, plus a great viewfinder IMHO.

As I can't use LCD screens for viewing and framing images and as I don't like external viewfinders, the X100 is a fantastic alternative to the X1, NEX 5 etc, etc. The built in 3 stop neutral density also worked well for me yesterday.

Yep, I sure like it!

[jonoslack]

HI There Marc

Originally Posted by fotografz

He doesn't have to deal with the short supply of M lenses, he already has the lenses. He has now insured it, but he used it to good effect when it wasn't insured. It is no more precious than a $8K Canon or Nikon ... and a lot easier to hide

Quite, and apart from the rather dodgy restaurant episode that Terry refers to Most of the time I'm more likely to drop it than have it stolen.

Originally Posted by woodyspedden

Marc

You missed my point. I said that if his M9 and lenses were stolen, it is great to be covered financially but getting replacement lenses may take forever at the current state of Leica production. The fact that he already has lenses is wonderful but doesn't deal with what happens if they are stolen. Getting a 50Lux has now been a major dilemma for over a year and things don't seem to be getting better.

Hi Woody - of course you're right about the lenses, but there are plenty of good substitutes while you wait (Zeiss, secondhand etc.), so although getting right back up there may take some time, getting shooting again wouldn't.

all the best

[jonoslack]

Originally Posted by The Smoking Camera

Interesting discussion.
Much depends on whether one owns an M9.
Just out of curiosity and slightly off topic - what is a nice one, two and three kit lens for the M9?
Slippery road ahead.

Oh Joe!
it is a bit slippery.

I'm not far away from Tom, but he misses out the lovely 28 'cron

so
1 lens:
50 summilux

2 lens 28 summicron and 50 summilux

3 lens 28 summicron, 50 summilux, 75 summicron

all the best

[Paratom]

Originally Posted by jonoslack

Oh Joe!
it is a bit slippery.

I'm not far away from Tom, but he misses out the lovely 28 'cron

so
1 lens:
50 summilux

2 lens 28 summicron and 50 summilux

3 lens 28 summicron, 50 summilux, 75 summicron

all the best

Hi Jono,
I find the 28 cron too close to 35.
Lately I prefer 24 if I use wide angle becaue images are a little bit more dynamic. Matter of taste.

[jonoslack]

Originally Posted by t_streng

Hi Jono,
I find the 28 cron too close to 35.
Lately I prefer 24 if I use wide angle becaue images are a little bit more dynamic. Matter of taste.

I do agree - on both counts
You'll notice I haven't included either of my Grand Lenses (or the 35 'lux come to that) - I like the 28 'cron's gentle look, but also the size (long since given up with that grotesque lens hood).

[glenerrolrd]

Originally Posted by jonoslack

I do agree - on both counts
You'll notice I haven't included either of my Grand Lenses (or the 35 'lux come to that) - I like the 28 'cron's gentle look, but also the size (long since given up with that grotesque lens hood).

Good subject for another topic. While the character of the lenses is often in the eye of the beholder.....it is clear that as the Leica glass gets faster and newer designs ...the contrast (both macro and micro ) and the color saturation pick up . You will notice a little more snap in the images .

That isn t always a benefit ..it depends on the subject and the light . If you have soft overcast skies or reflected available light ....the new glass can add some richness to the IQ . On a raining day I almost always start with my 35 /14 apsh . On a bright sun shiny day or in say the slanting harsh light of a summer evening (without cloud) its the 28/2 summicron everytime. This of course pushes the images toward the middle which then lets me adjust in post processing.

Obviously both of these lenses are superb and you could build a kit starting with either of them.

However the most important decision should be FOV and unless you work with 2 bodies . the 35 requires significantly less changing of lenses . With 2 bodies its the 28/50 for my body caps.

The focal length that doesn t work well is 75 ...because you would expect the summilux to be edgy and contrasty . Its such an old design that its closer to the pre asph 50 and has much lower contrast wide open than the 75 summicron .

For overcast,winter,softer light .....its the 24/35 summiluxes and the 75 summicron. For say Florida in the winter ..its the 21/2.8,28/2,50/2 and the 75/1.4 . Doesn t seem right does it .

[jonoslack]

Originally Posted by glenerrolrd

Good subject for another topic. While the character of the lenses is often in the eye of the beholder.....it is clear that as the Leica glass gets faster and newer designs ...the contrast (both macro and micro ) and the color saturation pick up . You will notice a little more snap in the images .

That isn t always a benefit ..it depends on the subject and the light . If you have soft overcast skies or reflected available light ....the new glass can add some richness to the IQ . On a raining day I almost always start with my 35 /14 apsh . On a bright sun shiny day or in say the slanting harsh light of a summer evening (without cloud) its the 28/2 summicron everytime. This of course pushes the images toward the middle which then lets me adjust in post processing.

Obviously both of these lenses are superb and you could build a kit starting with either of them.

However the most important decision should be FOV and unless you work with 2 bodies . the 35 requires significantly less changing of lenses . With 2 bodies its the 28/50 for my body caps.

I must say, I always work on a FOV basis, but the weather angle is certainly food for thought.

The focal length that doesn t work well is 75 ...because you would expect the summilux to be edgy and contrasty . Its such an old design that its closer to the pre asph 50 and has much lower contrast wide open than the 75 summicron .

Originally Posted by glenerrolrd

For overcast,winter,softer light .....its the 24/35 summiluxes and the 75 summicron. For say Florida in the winter ..its the 21/2.8,28/2,50/2 and the 75/1.4 . Doesn t seem right does it .

Hi Roger - doesn't seem right that you have all those lenses - I think you should immediately send me all the ones I'm missing!

It is a good topic for conversation - but probably elsewhere.

all the best

[kuau]

Ashwin, greetings
I agree with you from what I have seen the X100 looks great and I am sure that if i didn't already have an X1 I would for sure have ordered the X100.
I got a really good deal on my X1, I paid 1800 for mine but it included the X1 grip and Leica optical finder so I'm happy and my wife can easily put it in her purse and its very easy for her to use
I'm happy, though I may take a look at in the future the X200 if it has a 18mp sensor.

Steven

Originally Posted by ashwinrao1

Steve, greetings....I find the X100 more pocketable than the M9, similar to the X1....IQ is different. You aren't wrong to stick with the X1....but the x100 is lovely....

[woodyspedden]

I have, like Jono, decided to return my X100. I love the possibilities of this camera but in its present form there are just too many issues. For me the biggest one is the abominable manual focus. The "fly by wire" approach, requiring many turns to get the focus right, is just poorly implemented.

My bet is that there will be an X200 that will have a larger sensor, better firmware, and the ability to use the buttons (like RAW) for additional Fn use so that more often used functions can be at the button instead of buried in the menus.

I love what I was able to do with the camera but in the end, for me the K-5 proved to be a much better choice for a carry everywhere camera. A great deal of this decision was based on the K-5's ability to change lenses I must admit.

Woody

[glenerrolrd]

Originally Posted by woodyspedden

I have, like Jono, decided to return my X100. I love the possibilities of this camera but in its present form there are just too many issues. For me the biggest one is the abominable manual focus. The "fly by wire" approach, requiring many turns to get the focus right, is just poorly implemented.

My bet is that there will be an X200 that will have a larger sensor, better firmware, and the ability to use the buttons (like RAW) for additional Fn use so that more often used functions can be at the button instead of buried in the menus.

I love what I was able to do with the camera but in the end, for me the K-5 proved to be a much better choice for a carry everywhere camera. A great deal of this decision was based on the K-5's ability to change lenses I must admit.

Woody

Woody

I am sure I will eventually come to the same conclusion but for different reasons .

On focusing..I am very happy setting the camera on Manual and using the rear AF button ..same as I would a Nikon DSLR . The APS sensor with a 23mm lens gives you plenty of DOF . I just tested it at about 7-8 I was getting 18-24 inches in good focus at F2 . Thats plenty ..but I think about Street shooting where the target range is generally 6ft-30ft with a 35mm lens.

More importantly is the std FOV is set up for 35mm .....which is too wide for the wide open landscape in Colorado (or Florida) . Its just a great set up for a urban environment ..could shoot for days in paris or nyc with a 35mm FOV .

[jonoslack]

Hmmmmm
well, following an excellent and honest response from Fuji UK about the shortcomings I'm rather reconsidering my decision . . . . . .

[The Smoking Camera]

Appreciate everyone's input on the M9.
Always fun to dream.

Jono, can you comment on your discussion with Fuji UK?
Or did you sign a non-disclosure clause?

[cosinaphile]

having read thru all the comments , i would have to agree that even though the leica m9 gives better iq at low isos , i must say that at 3200 iso and above which street shooters must use at dusk or night , the x 100 shines and the m9 files approach ,unuseable
the m9 is a fin ecamera , but its cost with even a modest lens , is astronomical and it simply isnt an option for most of the citizens of the world... sadly.

thare seems to be a strange disconnect in the world today where those folks , a tiny fraction of us can buy and use 10s of thousands of dollars without a second thought
forget the reality of the world today , its very charming to use a m9 to photograph peasant children in a third world country , but easy to forget that an m 9 kit represents
an amount of money that could change the destiny of an entire village and provide life saving medicines and food for thousand of victims of the economic disparity that is primiarily the result of rich nations victimizing the unempowered people of the world

so it is that people that sit atop oil fields in Nigeria live at the edge of survival
and those atop fields of diamonds see their children hungry or die of curable ailments

i will shoot with my x 100 my x 10 and micro 43 equipment , theres thousands invested here too ....forget every thing i just wrote ,

i feel no guilt about wearing my leather shoes , but would never ever own a fur i guess that what i mean about the price of a camera... there is a vague line ,here lies excess....

[fotografz]

Originally Posted by cosinaphile

having read thru all the comments , i would have to agree that even though the leica m9 gives better iq at low isos , i must say that at 3200 iso and above which street shooters must use at dusk or night , the x 100 shines and the m9 files approach ,unuseable
the m9 is a fin ecamera , but its cost with even a modest lens , is astronomical and it simply isnt an option for most of the citizens of the world... sadly.

thare seems to be a strange disconnect in the world today where those folks , a tiny fraction of us can buy and use 10s of thousands of dollars without a second thought
forget the reality of the world today , its very charming to use a m9 to photograph peasant children in a third world country , but easy to forget that an m 9 kit represents
an amount of money that could change the destiny of an entire village and provide life saving medicines and food for thousand of victims of the economic disparity that is primiarily the result of rich nations victimizing the unempowered people of the world

so it is that people that sit atop oil fields in Nigeria live at the edge of survival
and those atop fields of diamonds see their children hungry or die of curable ailments

i will shoot with my x 100 my x 10 and micro 43 equipment , theres thousands invested here too ....forget every thing i just wrote ,

i feel no guilt about wearing my leather shoes , but would never ever own a fur i guess that what i mean about the price of a camera... there is a vague line ,here lies excess....

No problem shooting "street" at dusk or night with a M9 ... ISO 1,000 and my $10,500. Leica Noctilux 0.95

Don't assume that because someone works hard and enjoys the fruits of their labors, that they do nothing to help those less fortunate.

When those underprivileged nations throw out the dictator eating lavish meals off solid gold plates while his people starve ... or oil kings that sit on top of those oil fields start living with less so others may live ... then maybe I'll reassess my own indulgences and any sense of guilt.

[jonoslack]

Originally Posted by cosinaphile

i will shoot with my x 100 my x 10 and micro 43 equipment , theres thousands invested here too ....forget every thing i just wrote ,

i feel no guilt about wearing my leather shoes , but would never ever own a fur i guess that what i mean about the price of a camera... there is a vague line ,here lies excess....

Yes indeed - but everyone's vague line is somewhere different, and as Marc says, the fact that one uses an expensive camera doesn't really indicate how one runs one's life.

Still, the X100's pretty expensive as well!

Just to step out of the quagmire of guilt and world politics, . . and back into cameras:
My problem with the X100 was that I thought it was fiddly, I found it hard to see what was in focus and when, it had 80000 options I didn't need, didn't want, and couldn't readily switch off.

Assuming that I didn't (couldn't) have an M9, but that i could afford an X100, then I'd unquestionably get a NEX 5n with a viewfinder, an M adapter and a nice CV lense - better high ISO, nicer to use, more flexible (not as sexy to look at though, and not as quiet).

But that's just me

[lowep]

Why compare a $1K+ x100 with a $6K+ M9?

Instead would like to know how the IQ of the X100 compares with a used M8 that is only double the price?