This site is supported by the advertisements on it, please disable your AdBlocker so we can continue to provide you with the quality content you expect.

The X-Pro2: A Worthy Successor?

Discussion in 'X-Pro2 and X-Pro1' started by adamjbonn, Sep 4, 2016.

  1. adamjbonn

    adamjbonn adambonn.com

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2014
    Messages:
    2,254
    Likes Received:
    1,336
    Location:
    Porto, Portugal

    -Return to Top-

    I took the XP1 and XP2 and the M9 out at the same time and shot a bunch of crap for kicks and giggles and on that given day I personally found I preferred each camera about 1/3 of the time

    A lot of it depends what's in the frame, especially in colour.

    I'm really enjoying the M9 (I've had it 6 months now), but of the 3 the XP1 is the best combination of pleasing looking images, not much work in PP and a broad range of usage.

    The M9 wins for the work in least PP (I joke that it's a SOOC RAW camera) but has the least operating range, the XP2 has the most operating range, but requires the most work in PP

    (operating range = ISO performance, speed of target acquisition, speed of changing settings and modes on the camera and speed of things like boot up, image review, shot-to-shot times, buffer clearing)

    The hardest thing about swapping between the three is the shutter lag differences and remembering the frameline inaccuracies

    All of the above is my personal opinion based on my personal experiences in using cameras that I personally like. Others mileage can and will vary.
     
    beakhammer likes this.
  2. beakhammer

    beakhammer Premium Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2013
    Messages:
    10,845
    Likes Received:
    7,185
    Location:
    Salish Sea

    -Return to Top-

    I am interested in all of these factors, but in the end what matters most to me is what the files look like. This doesn't really help though, because which sensors or films make the best files depends on shooting conditions such as available light, white balance, etc. etc.
     
  3. adamjbonn

    adamjbonn adambonn.com

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2014
    Messages:
    2,254
    Likes Received:
    1,336
    Location:
    Porto, Portugal

    -Return to Top-

    To my eye the M makes the nicest files (of the 3) in sunlight at base ISO. (Not saying it’s head and shoulders above the other two)

    However, come away much away from sunlight and base iso and that changes quickly
     
  4. AdrianG

    AdrianG Premium Member

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2016
    Messages:
    1,643
    Likes Received:
    1,314
    Location:
    CH, UK, GHA

    -Return to Top-

    Aye, because:
    Thanks for answering.
    Ok, I asked the wrong guy. Sorry for not paying enough attention.
    Leica lenses have stepless apertures, some with full stop clicks but most (unfortunately) with half stop clicks for reference, but you can set your aperture at any value between those clicks. Film Leicas (except the M7) have stepless SS dials as well, with full stop clicks for reference, while your M9 has half stop steps with half stop clicks. That's exactly the dilemma with digital Leicas, they try to mimic film Leicas and fail to match them, but they also fail to match other digital cameras BECAUSE they mimic film Leicas. They simply are not very good cameras, except for the M10, which is at least a decent Leica. The film M OTOH (they are all +/- the same) is unmatched to this day by any camera, film or digital, in its core competence. If you look for a camera which stays out of your way, look no further, though you have to break it down into its components to remove a spent film and then reassemble it around the fresh roll... The upside is you can do it yourself without tools and don't need to send it to Wetzlar to have it done.

    Not sure if anything is wrong with your lens, but below is a comparison of my 1952 radioactive 5cm Summicron wide open vs my XF56R at f/2. Both crops are from SOOC images as shot with my XP2.

    XF56R, 1/125, f/2, 400 ASA:
    56.jpeg

    Leica Summicron 1:2/5cm (SOOIC), 1/125, f/2, 500 ASA:
    cron.jpeg

    The SOOIC Summicron is a bit softish wide open and scary-sharp by f/4, yet it can keep up wide open with the 56R, which is already stoped down countless clicks (just shy of one figer width...) on its 1/3 stop clicked ring by f/2. The Summicron's superior clarity is striking. Your Leica examples lack this typical Summicron sharpness, clarity and detail. This may have several reasons, such as your Leica's range finder may be out of sync with your lens, you may have missed focus, the Leica images got blurred by downsizing, etc, but to me it looks exactly like internal haze in your lens. A common problem with Leica lenses after about 15 to 20 years and not very expensive to fix.
     
    YogiMik and adamjbonn like this.
  5. adamjbonn

    adamjbonn adambonn.com

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2014
    Messages:
    2,254
    Likes Received:
    1,336
    Location:
    Porto, Portugal

    -Return to Top-

    Thanks @AdrianG I’ll have a closer look at it. It’s not got haze, I checked that when I got it, and it’s a modern one (6bit coded), I’ve not really noticed anything untoward looking at raw full size, in fact I usually turn sharpening down a little on the Leica files!
     
  6. lawsofphysics

    lawsofphysics Premium Member

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2013
    Messages:
    2,560
    Likes Received:
    991
    Location:
    usa

    -Return to Top-

    Subjective perceptions of image rendering aside, everything the XP1 did the XP2 does better.

    I much prefer working with XP2 raw files. I never used in-camera JPEGs with either.
     
    Shadowside and jedorme like this.
  7. adamjbonn

    adamjbonn adambonn.com

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2014
    Messages:
    2,254
    Likes Received:
    1,336
    Location:
    Porto, Portugal

    -Return to Top-

    More or less

    The framelines are thicker and brighter in the xp1, and the display icons are bigger and easier to see too.
     
  8. Threaded

    Threaded Premium Member

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2016
    Messages:
    267
    Likes Received:
    173

    -Return to Top-

    The new XP2 firmware (coming sometime this month) apparently has an option for bigger display icons - it’ll be interesting to see how that compares to the original.
     
  9. YogiMik

    YogiMik Premium Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2014
    Messages:
    2,948
    Likes Received:
    2,464
    Location:
    Norway

    -Return to Top-

    Your cron is yammy . . . is it version 3 ?
     
  10. adamjbonn

    adamjbonn adambonn.com

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2014
    Messages:
    2,254
    Likes Received:
    1,336
    Location:
    Porto, Portugal

    -Return to Top-

    I don’t think it’ll thicken the framelines and larger icons might decrease what we have have displayed on the screen, perhaps the focus scale. We’ll have to wait and see
     
  11. adamjbonn

    adamjbonn adambonn.com

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2014
    Messages:
    2,254
    Likes Received:
    1,336
    Location:
    Porto, Portugal

    -Return to Top-

    What means “Yammy” (urban dictionary is quite rude here :D)

    It’s a type 5 (the newest one)

    Based on Adrian’s comments I had a good look at it and through it yesterday and couldn’t see anything that troubled me

    Here’s a shot from earlier this year taken with it

    Please login or register to view links by Please login or register to view links, on Flickr
     
    daggy and YogiMik like this.
  12. YogiMik

    YogiMik Premium Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2014
    Messages:
    2,948
    Likes Received:
    2,464
    Location:
    Norway

    -Return to Top-

    I've asked AdrianG this question. I know, his got one of the oldest ones, probably v.3. I'm not interested in new ones, I've found them quite boring, and of course overprised.
    Yammy means tasty . . something like that. Adrian has made a comparison of his cron with 56R . . . Having this cron, I'd definitely get rid of 56R. That's why I'm interested, which cron it is. I've got Sonnar ZM 50/1.5, which is also better than 56R, but, it produces very warm, powerful colors, that I not always like. His cron seems to be well balanced.
     
    Last edited: May 16, 2018
  13. Threaded

    Threaded Premium Member

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2016
    Messages:
    267
    Likes Received:
    173

    -Return to Top-

    So I think I’ve been working up to this a while.

    For a few weeks I’ve been doing what I don’t do nearly enough of and actually looking back at pictures I’ve taken.. and it really is the X-Pro1 images that stand out. I’ve spent a lot of time jumping between similar shots (often a year or more apart) between the XP1 and 2 and invariably, while the latter will have more resolution and clarity, it’s the XP1 version I prefer. The XP1 that’s more subtle, more organic, the more like I remember, and how I want to remember, even if that means it’s less starkly real. The XP1 interprets things more like the way I like to see them.

    The other thing I noticed, which surprised me more, was that the XP1 images seemed to capture the moments better - the expressions, the positions, the fleeting second when things come right in the frame. I didn’t expect this since I thought the XP2 made me more nimble, but I wonder now whether the speed of the XP2 just makes me lazy and leads me to rattle off to many shots without taking the time to wait for the picture. I think the whole “a slower camera makes you a better photographer” schtick is mostly apologist BS for slow AF, but I wonder whether there isn’t a risk that faster cameras make you too trigger happy sometimes.

    I’ve been making very logical lists of all the strong suits of the XP2 and all the many reasons why it’s a better camera, and it absolutely is a better camera to use. Faster, easier, more reliable (especially with its dual card slots), improved controls, etc etc.

    But I’m more convinced than ever that the results out of the camera are *not* better, and that’s a big deal for me. I shoot jpegs because I don’t want to spend time editing images on a computer. Making it easier to shoot the images, but harder to get the images to look the way I want, is no advantage to me. I’d rather have a camera that’s more of a PITA to use and requires a bit more patience to shoot, but then gives me jpegs up front which are worth it. And that’s the XP1.

    I’ve been thinking the unthinkable for a while now and something happened this week to finally push me over the edge. Our cooker broke, and we need a new one. It’s not a good time to be sitting on an expensive camera that I’m not really enjoying. So...

    I have a “new” X-Pro1 in the post.

    My X-Pro2 will be going on the ‘bay.

    And I am stupidly happy about this..
     
    Sapphie, Kirstybell and daggy like this.
  14. adamjbonn

    adamjbonn adambonn.com

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2014
    Messages:
    2,254
    Likes Received:
    1,336
    Location:
    Porto, Portugal

    -Return to Top-

    I wondered if you meant yummy or gammy!

    I don't know what year mine is from, it's 6 bit coded... I think even the newest one has a design unchanged from the early 1990s. None of them are APSH

    The foreskin hood is an abomination, the earlier ones IMO had a better hood
     
  15. adamjbonn

    adamjbonn adambonn.com

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2014
    Messages:
    2,254
    Likes Received:
    1,336
    Location:
    Porto, Portugal

    -Return to Top-

    :)

    I've been there too!

    Your SOOC usage does limit you a bit on what the camera can do (an observation, not a judgement)

    I think there might be some truth in that a slower camera makes you think about the shot more, I 100% agree about "I think the whole “a slower camera makes you a better photographer” schtick is mostly apologist BS" but perhaps a slower camera forces you into being the photographer that you can be, rather than it makes you a better one

    I hope the XP1 is all good and fine, also eBay often send me those 'flog something and only pay a quid final value fee' offers, I assume they do to you too, so try and wait for one of those (he said mansplainingly)
     
  16. AdrianG

    AdrianG Premium Member

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2016
    Messages:
    1,643
    Likes Received:
    1,314
    Location:
    CH, UK, GHA

    -Return to Top-

    That's very well possible. In this case the lack of sharpness and pop in your examples is probably the result of down sizing. I find it harder to downsize images from my Summicron lenses than from Fuji lenses, even if shot with the XP2. I also feel that I need to turn sharpening down with Summicron images from the XP2 compared to XF lenses. It seems sharpening doesn't do much except introduce artifacts.

    :D:D:D yammy, eh?
    No it's not a version 3. It is an early type (there are at least 3 versions) of the first ever Summicron, produced in 1952, prior to its introduction. It's tread mount. It has a unique 7/6 design and radioactive glass. I got this lens used from its first owner 40 years ago, after it had seen a 25 year service life. I don't think there has been a month I didn't use it since. However, it is tricky to shoot at times and I don't think there are too many left in good enough shape for serious use.
    They are not boring and of course not over priced. The latest APO-ASPH version is very, very expensive, and I don't think anyone could rectify the price with the added performance it offers over a £500 type 3, which will not usually be visible anyway. But it's a piece of art of mechanical craftsmanship, and handmade jewelry comes at a price. Obviously, I would never buy this lens becaus I could not justifie its price, but that doesn't mean it's over priced. However, I have the same optical version as @adamjbonn, too, but with the earlier, smaller, lighter, better, less expensive mechanical design, either of which you can get for roughly 1k quid used. Except for the price it doesn't make a difference whether you get one of these new or used. For the same kind of money you get a 1950's rigid Summicron in comparable shape. The "rigid" and DR versions have a 7/6 design derived from the one I have, all later types are 6/4. The real world difference between the 6/4 versions is neglectable. The reason one would shoot a Summicron over anything else is because it can make things look real like nothing else. You can see that in my example to some extent and also in one of the examples from @adamjbonn's article, the one with the street sign next to the wall. The rigid and DR versions flare less than mine but more than the 6/4 ones and all of them have a bit less of that "make things look real" power than my version. The 6/4 design is FAR easier to shoot.

    That is essentially the difference between any Zeiss and any Leica lens.
     
    YogiMik and adamjbonn like this.
  17. adamjbonn

    adamjbonn adambonn.com

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2014
    Messages:
    2,254
    Likes Received:
    1,336
    Location:
    Porto, Portugal

    -Return to Top-

    When I looked at crons they all cost about £1k if they were full sets in good condition it just came down to how old they were!

    I also own a 90 2.5 summarit, which I got ex-demo from a dealer (so that’s effectively brand new, with full 2 year Leica warranty) It cost me £25 more than fuji wants for the xf90

    Leica is NEVER cheap, but if you pick carefully and don’t buy the newest stuff you can build a system for roundabout what people are paying for an XH1 and the pro zooms or a Sony A7Rii (that’s Rii NOT Riii) and GM glass

    Of course the Leica cameras and lenses are dinosaurs compared to modern gear, and I’m comparing secondhand to new, but that’s not my point, my point is that with some careful shopping, one can pick up stuff for roundabouts the same coin as people are spending on modern systems. The VFM proposition is down to the individual

    I’ve had a few weird conversations with my irl friends where they’ve been shocked I got the M and I point out they’ve actually spend a lot more money than I have on the contents of their camera cupboard, the contention seems to be that the M and the glass doesn’t have AF, and my counter point is that money is money and being happy with your gear is what you’re actually buying.

    (It’s cost me more money over the years to settle on my fuji kit with all the body and lens flips than it has to build a 3 lens M kit, none of which should depreciate much as I’ve bought it all secondhand)
     
    YogiMik likes this.
  18. gyoung

    gyoung Premium Member

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2013
    Messages:
    460
    Likes Received:
    169
    Location:
    Nottingham

    -Return to Top-

    I too love my Summicron, its the first rigid version, I have had it for 30 years, a perfect match for my M3. Its the best 50mm lens I have ever owned or used in 60 years of photography. i.e it is the sharpest across the frame at large apertures, and has wonderful rendering of colours and tones, even on digital. I won't ever part with it voluntarily
    The 35mm Summicrons are similar on film but alas not so much on digital. Quirks of their design not suiting thick stack sensors in many cases.
    I wasted 18 months trying to make full frame (a Sony A7) work so I could use them as they were intended, before giving in and going for the XPRo2 which is a much more satisfactory (IMHO) implementation of modern technology and OVF than the Leica M digitals.

    Gerry
     
    adamjbonn and YogiMik like this.
  19. AdrianG

    AdrianG Premium Member

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2016
    Messages:
    1,643
    Likes Received:
    1,314
    Location:
    CH, UK, GHA

    -Return to Top-

    It's not actually age, it's condition. £1k gets you a 50mm Summicron in perfectly usable condition, regardless of age. Rare/collectible items left aside.

    Aye, but the XF90 is four times as big, which means you get four times as much from Fuji for the same coin, eh?

    If you search A7rii on Flickr you'll find that AF was irrelevant for 90% of the shots...

    I could sell the Leica gear I got 20 to 40 years ago for several times more today than I payed then. That doesn't mean it's worth more now, it just means it depreciated several times slower than the pound, which in turn means I'm better off financially than if I had left the money in my account, plus I got the benefit of using it all these years. Let's wait and see how well an A7RII fares by comparison 20 years down the line.
     
    YogiMik and adamjbonn like this.
  20. gyoung

    gyoung Premium Member

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2013
    Messages:
    460
    Likes Received:
    169
    Location:
    Nottingham

    -Return to Top-

    What 's an M3 worth today? I paid the equivalent (in Canadian dollars) of £66 for mine in 1968, brand new but at the cost price for the dealer I worked for.
    Even my M6ttl realised 75% of its purchase price after 12 years of use.
    I doubt an M9 or M10 will still be working that far ahead, and the A7 realised only 25% of its cost in trade in for the XPRo2 after 18 months.

    Gerry
     
    YogiMik likes this.

Share This Page