Advice is needed: Leica or Fujifilm x-Pro1 or X-E1?

Keep in mind that other companies produce Leica-M mount lenses, including Zeiss and Voigtlander. Perhaps not as refined as the Leica lenses, these lenses still offer great quality at more affordable prices.

Plus, there's the used Leica route, although you have to go back pretty far to get an inexpensive variant, as they retain their value. But if you go far back to the Leica screw mount (LTM/M39) era, you can pick up some pretty decent lenses by Canon, Nikon, Zeiss and others, along with the Leicas, of course. You just need a simple M-mount adaptor to use these LTM lenses.

sjones wrote in post #16150586
Keep in mind that other companies produce Leica-M mount lenses, including Zeiss and Voigtlander. Perhaps not as refined as the Leica lenses, these lenses still offer great quality at more affordable prices.

Plus, there's the used Leica route, although you have to go back pretty far to get an inexpensive variant, as they retain their value. But if you go far back to the Leica screw mount (LTM/M39) era, you can pick up some pretty decent lenses by Canon, Nikon, Zeiss and others, along with the Leicas, of course. You just need a simple M-mount adaptor to use these LTM lenses.

Thanks, you pointed out something important. I can use the Zeiss and Voigtlanders until I graduate to Leica lens (once I win the Super Lotto). I do have som Leica M39 mount that have used with adaptor on the M42 mounts. A good time to use them. So Leica is!. As soon as I can, I will post samples.

BTW, someone mentioned that the M8 needs UV/IR Cut filter. Can someone explain is that is really necessary>?
Thanks, Pepe

I had the X-Pro1 and sold it in favor of the X-E1's smaller size. Do you require an OVF? If so go with the X-Pro1. If you're okay with EVF and a smaller body then go for the X-E1. Either way they both produce lovely images. Depends on your needs. I would like a Leica but it's not in my budget.

spamster wrote in post #16154250
I had the X-Pro1 and sold it in favor of the X-E1's smaller size. Do you require an OVF? If so go with the X-Pro1. If you're okay with EVF and a smaller body then go for the X-E1. Either way they both produce lovely images. Depends on your needs. I would like a Leica but it's not in my budget.

Some people swear taht the best combination is a Leica lens on the Fujifilm x-pro1. I would love to try that. Have you tried a Leica lens on your x-e1?

Pepe Guitarra wrote in post #16155614
Some people swear taht the best combination is a Leica lens on the Fujifilm x-pro1. I would love to try that. Have you tried a Leica lens on your x-e1?

Not sure why people would make this claim. Fuji makes some excellent optics, and I really find it hard to believe that leica would make anything substantially better (if even better).

Charlie wrote in post #16155796
Not sure why people would make this claim. Fuji makes some excellent optics, and I really find it hard to believe that leica would make anything substantially better (if even better).

I think you might be right in this day and age.

But are you ready to live with a camera that's simply "good enough"?

Pepe Guitarra wrote in post #16147471
Also, if I am missing something, please feel free to tell me. I really appreciate your advice, I need it. Pepe

For my landscape photography here in the Rocky Mountains, I carry two cameras - Sigma DP1 Merrill (19mm) and Sigma DP3 Merrill (50mm). At ISO 100 and 200 they are outstanding. I avoid shooting them over ISO 400 though. Raw files are huge - in the 55 mb range - and you have to use Sigma's software to convert to other formats (I usually export as 16-bit TIFFs in ProRGB and import into Aperture for further edits). But only the Nikon D800 exceeds the resolution of these cameras, which are 1.5x APS-C and are roughly equivalent to a 30 mpix Bayer image.

I have had a Fuji X-E1 for about 6 months now and it is a fabulous camera. At 16 mpix, it has the same resolving power as my 5D Mark II but less than half the weight. It also provides a stop more of dynamic range. I only have two Fuji lenses for it - the 18-55 and 14mm - and they are superb. I recently sold my Zeiss 21mm ZE because the Fuji/14mm is just as good optically and a lot lighter. I also use it with several Canon FD and Zeiss C/Y manual focus lenses from the film days. The EVF, focus magnification and peaking make it pretty easy to focus, plus when you stop down the EVF brightens. The EVF can be sluggish to update in poor light or if you stop down to past f/11 or so. But it's great for carrying around, travel, landscape and candids.

My 5Dii isn't getting much use anymore, mostly for portraiture work. It's really heavy compared to the Fuji and the Sigmas. I have sold several lenses and will sell a few more. I only plan to keep the 24-70, 50 f/1.4, 135 f/2L, 70-200 f/4L IS, and 150mm macro, plus my three Canon flashes for studio work.

Very happy with the XE-1 and Sigmas

I've gone full circle myself, going from a NEX-6 to an XE-1, to now a RX1. Though I did get a great deal on a used NEX-7 to help build up my manual collection for the anticipated NEX-7 update or the FF-NEX.

the XE-1 just didn't fit with me. I bought it, tried it with the kit zoom and even ordered the 35 1.4 but something with the camera didn't fit me. Maybe it was the grip, but even after buying the Fuji grip it wasn't comfortable. The EVF lag, the lower resolution rear screen, even the cheesy graphic when deleting files. The JPEGs were really nice OOC, but it felt hollow and empty.

The RX1 I bought like new from Amazon for almost $700 off retail, so while still expensive, it was a pretty good deal. It feels substantial. The RAW files are tremendous, the pop that the Zeiss lens has is great. But after using it for almost a month I understand its limitations. I don't like that peaking only works in magnified view. While I do like the leaf shutter, I don't like that it doesn't have a remote shutter option. I've gotten used to the grip. Battery life could be better. I don't have the EVF so I can't comment on its quality. While I do like the 35mm lens and used a Zeiss 24 on the 6 when I had it, I do miss wide angle shots. The lack of tilting screen does bother me. And for some reason knowing that the camera is so expensive I feel like I need to be way too careful with it. That's not to say that I throw my gear around, but I do like to not have to feel like I should be wearing surgical gloves.

I did pick up a EOS M for the wife and while its a nice camera for her, I could never make it my main. The lack of manual control, the spotty AF, the lack of good manual focusing tools, etc make it a green box camera that's an improvement over her old P&S.

All this has brought me back to buying a NEX-7 for a really good deal, adding a few Speed Boosters and picking up some good quality lenses. I just picked up a C/Y Zeiss 50 1.7 for a great price and will pair it with a Speed Booster. I'm awaiting the NEX-7 replacement and which point ill sell the newly acquired 7 and not take that big a loss or the long awaited FF NEX.

Tony-S wrote in post #16156394
For my landscape photography here in the Rocky Mountains, I carry two cameras - Sigma DP1 Merrill (19mm) and Sigma DP2 Merrill (50mm). At ISO 100 and 200 they are outstanding. I avoid shooting them over ISO 400 though. Raw files are huge - in the 55 mb range - and you have to use Sigma's software to convert to other formats (I usually export as 16-bit TIFFs in ProRGB and import into Aperture for further edits). But only the Nikon D800 exceeds the resolution of these cameras, which are 1.5x APS-C and are roughly equivalent to a 30 mpix Bayer image.

I try not to plug in my sigmas in every thread cause it gets old, but... the above post echoes my experience with pre-merrill DP1 and DP2. I use them as uncoupled rangefinders, but the image quality up to ISO400 is wonderful.

DocFrankenstein wrote in post #16156998
I try not to plug in my sigmas in every thread cause it gets old, but... the above post echoes my experience with pre-merrill DP1 and DP2. I use them as uncoupled rangefinders, but the image quality up to ISO400 is wonderful.

My friend had the DP1 and DP2 and is selling them to me at $600 a piece. I know one sells for $700+ and the other for $1,100+ when new. However, the size of the files and pp is what is laborious. And you need two cameras, one for wide angle and another for normal lens. I have not removed that possibility, but the proprietary pp is what bothers me. I use LR4.

TMaG82 wrote in post #16156826
... The RX1 I bought like new from Amazon for almost $700 off retail, so while still expensive, it was a pretty good deal. It feels substantial. The RAW files are tremendous, the pop that the Zeiss lens has is great. But after using it for almost a month I understand its limitations. I don't like that peaking only works in magnified view. While I do like the leaf shutter, I don't like that it doesn't have a remote shutter option. I've gotten used to the grip. Battery life could be better. I don't have the EVF so I can't comment on its quality. While I do like the 35mm lens and used a Zeiss 24 on the 6 when I had it, I do miss wide angle shots. The lack of tilting screen does bother me. And for some reason knowing that the camera is so expensive I feel like I need to be way too careful with it. That's not to say that I throw my gear around, but I do like to not have to feel like I should be wearing surgical gloves.

The SOny rx1 is nice camera with a high ISO tolerance.

Pepe Guitarra wrote in post #16157127
My friend had the DP1 and DP2 and is selling them to me at $600 a piece. I know one sells for $700+ and the other for $1,100+ when new. However, the size of the files and pp is what is laborious. And you need two cameras, one for wide angle and another for normal lens. I have not removed that possibility, but the proprietary pp is what bothers me. I use LR4.

I haven't used lightroom since the beta release, so I can't comment on how it compares.

The sigma software provides all of the major adjustments to the raw files and their "fill light" feature is great. 16 bit tiffs can be exported and I imagine processed further down the road.

DocFrankenstein wrote in post #16157145
I haven't used lightroom since the beta release, so I can't comment on how it compares.

The sigma software provides all of the major adjustments to the raw files and their "fill light" feature is great. 16 bit tiffs can be exported and I imagine processed further down the road.

Doc:
I like your signature, you may add the following:

EFFECT: (Noun) The result of you doing something
AFFECT: (Verb) The changes that result of an action

PRINCIPAL: The director of the school, also, the amount of money you owe.
PRINCIPLE: A rule or value that grow out of our beliefs.

DocFrankenstein wrote in post #16156998
I try not to plug in my sigmas in every thread cause it gets old, but... the above post echoes my experience with pre-merrill DP1 and DP2. I use them as uncoupled rangefinders, but the image quality up to ISO400 is wonderful.

Choosing a camera has an algorithm for me:

IF shot can be made with Sigma, use it
OTHERWISE
IF shot can be made with Fuji, use it
ELSE use Canon

Pepe Guitarra wrote in post #16157234
Doc:
I like your signature, you may add the following:

EFFECT: (Noun) The result of you doing something
AFFECT: (Verb) The changes that result of an action

While usage of "affect" as a noun is mostly antiquated, it is acceptable in old English. And "effect" is commonly used as a transitive verb. But you are correct that these words are often misused.