Naked Eye: Leica M9 vs FujiFilm X Pro-1

JPEG #A STRAIGHT OUT OF CAMERA

 JPEG # B STRAIGHT OUT OF CAMERA

JPEG #A  (AUTO FIX IN PHOTOSHOP)

JPEG #B (AUTO FIX IN PHOTOSHOP)

Another poll for those who like playing the game.

Here are JPEG #A and JPEG #B; one is made with a Leica M9 at 200 iso with a Leica Elmarit 28mm at f2.8, while the other was made with a Fuji X Pro-1 at 200 iso with a Fujinon 18mm (equivalent of 27mm) at f2.0. The photographs were made within a few seconds from each other under the same lighting conditions, and using an automatic shutter speed.

The lower two are the same images after using Auto Fix in Photoshop. No other processing was done to either of them.

So what's your call? Which image was made with the M9, and which with the X Pro-1?




After having handled the M9 for about 15 months and the X Pro-1 for just over a week, I feel that both have a place in my tool box.  It took me a few hours to understand the ins and outs of the X Pro-1, and I haven't had frustrations to speak of once I ironed out its quirks. In contrast, the Leica M9 is a difficult camera with which I had considerable frustrations (and some pleasures) so far.

I am neither a Leica cheerleader nor a X Pro-1 groupie, and as I imply earlier, I consider them both to be useful tools for different jobs. That said, while the M9's build is better (more solid) than the X Pro-1, its many shortcomings (lack of AF, abysmal display, image quality issues at ISOs higher than 640, etc) are difficult to tolerate with the appearance of the X Pro-1 that is also well-built, has reasonable quality glass, has good image quality to 6400 iso, and a lovely display, apart from its many other technical advantages, such as its revolutionary hybrid viewfinder as one of numerous examples.

"Will the FujiFilm X Pro-1 dethrone the Leica M9? "

Sure, the Leica M9 not only has a mystique, but more tangibly, also provides a special 'feel' to the  photographs it produces...but the X Pro-1 image quality is excellent. Does it have the Leica "feel"? No it doesn't. The M9 is a full frame camera, and the X Pro-1 isn't. However, it has an APS-C sized sensor, which produces images that are said to be equal, if not superior, to those of full-frame cameras.

Will the FujiFilm X Pro-1 dethrone the Leica M9? I doubt it...but it's a very serious contender, and fills a niche for photographers who seek to add a digital rangefinder-like camera to their gear, and do not want to spend upwards of $7000 for a body to do it.

And for those who have voted in the previous poll in which I ask for the readers preference between photographs made with a Leica M9, a Fujifilm X Pro-1, a Canon 7D, a Canon 5D Mark II and a Panasonic GF1, the results favored the Leica M9 which got 38.5% of the votes, then the X Pro-1 which got about 33%.

Poll: Which Do You Prefer M9, 7D, 5DMK2, XPro1, GF1?

Photo © Tewfic El-Sawy (Canon 5D Mark II)

Photo © Tewfic El-Sawy (Canon 7D )

Photo © Tewfic El-Sawy (Panasonic GF1 -20mm)

Photo © Tewfic El-Sawy (Leica M9)

Photo © Tewfic El-Sawy (FujiFilm X Pro-1)

It's been raining in NYC for a couple of days, so I thought I'd have some fun with my photo gear and compare interior shots from the Canon 5D Mark II,  the Canon 7D, the Panasonic GF1, the Leica M9 and the FujiFilm X Pro-1. All of these images have not been processed in any way (except for being resized) and are jpegs out of the cameras.

While all of these have been shot at f2.8 and at an iso of 200 (the exception is the GF1), and at roughly the same time, there's obvious difference in many aspects between all of them. Another factor is that I had a 28-70mm f2.8 for the Canons, a 20mm for the GF1, a 28mm prime Leica lens for the M9, and a 18mm (equivalent to 27mm) on the X Pro-1.

This is hardly a scientific or a technical experiment, or an attempt to portray my preference...but just a quick look at what these different (in quality, price, type, etc)  cameras and lenses can produce, using an off-the-cuff methodology. In particular, take a good look at the images produced by the M9 and the X Pro-1.

So have some fun as well, and take the poll!!!

A Walk About With The FujiFilm X Pro-1

Photo © Tewfic El-Sawy (Shooting From The Hip/Crop)

Photo © Tewfic El-Sawy (Shot Thru The Viewfinder)

Well, I've had the FujiFilm X Pro-1 equipped with a Fuji 18mm f2.0 lens for about 48 hours, and I thought I'd jot my initial impressions down in a brief blog post. First off, I only skimmed the manual very quickly so don't expect any in-depth review. These are merely impressions from using it during a walk about on 14th Street in New York City, then a few moments in Washington Square. Some of the photographs were made shooting from the hip, while others were made by peering through the viewfinder.

Interestingly, I had a conversation with a photographer in Washington Square who asked me if it was a Leica. It certainly looks quite similar, but it's not a Leica in more ways than one.  Superficially-speaking, the Fuji X Pro-1 has much more to offer in terms of digital enhancements than the M9. Apart from its auto-focus, it has a plethora of options that purists may not particularly find useful...its shutter is softer and much more discreet than the M9...it's much lighter but is still a handful...its lenses are also much lighter than those made by Leica or Voigtlander.

Photo © Tewfic El-Sawy (Shot From The Hip)

Photo © Tewfic El-Sawy (Cropped. Shot From The Hip)

I had no difficulty whatsoever in adapting the X Pro-1 to my style of shooting from the hip. It's as unobtrusive as the M9, and the success rate is much higher with it than with the M9 because of its auto focus, which I chose to keep on single shot mode.

It seems to have a number of (possibly irritating) quirks, but I'll have to work with it a few more days before deciding if these are really camera quirks or whether they are caused by my inexperience.

As for the quality of its images. There's no question the quality of images made with an M9 equipped with Leica glass is really stellar, and their "feel" is different...I guess that's the renowned "Leica feel". The images from the X-Pro 1 are excellent, but they're more akin to the images by the Canon 5D Mark II (as an example). The images I've captured so far are very impressive in terms of quality especially from a crop sensor APS-C camera, but they can't be mistaken for images made with an M9.

Once again, this is not a scientific analysis nor an in depth review at all...just an initial impression when using the X Pro-1 and looking at the images I got from using it for a couple of hours. I did not intentionally choose specific scenes, but did what I usually do when I have my M9 around my neck.

What I didn't particularly like is that the X Pro-1 has the tendency of overexposing, so I dialed down by as much as half a stop and sometimes by 3/4 of a stop. And, there's isn't Lightroom or Photoshop RAW support for it yet.

I have found that I am shooting more and more wide angle, so the 18mm f2.0 lens is just perfect. It's perhaps early to say, but so far I like that lens a lot....it's fast and accurate.

As I said, this blog post is only partially peeling away the first layer of the X-Pro 1 "onion".

I've been asked what will I do now with the M9.  Already! I'm not a Leica fan-boy nor a X Pro-1 fan-boy either, so my answer is simple...I wil continue to use it along with the X-Pro 1. I can easily see myself using both in Vietnam and Thailand in the coming few months.

As I'm fond of saying....cameras are nothing but tools for the photographer. Exactly like a claw and ball-peen hammers are tools for carpenters who use them for different jobs...the M9 and the X Pro-1 will be used for different styles of photography. When everything is spot on, the Leica excels. Otherwise, it's not a forgiving tool. In contrast, I think the X Pro-1 will be much more forgiving.

More to come next week.

POV: Is May 10 The Day For Leica?

Photo Courtesy GIZMODO

May 10th.

That's when Leica will announce a "whole range of product launches" in Berlin. Am I waiting with bated breath for these new products? Not at all. But having a M9 and very much aware of its strong points and shortcomings, I'm interested in seeing what will Leica come up with. It's more from a business side than from a photographic one since the German company is under assault from Fuji and others that are treading on its turf.

I was recently sent a heads up by Zeyad Gohary on a new all-white $31,770 M9-P model with a Noctilux f/0.95 50mm lens. Ridiculous of course, but perhaps it will sell well amongst the moneyed elites, celebrities and collectors. I had a chuckle imagining it in my grubby hands had I had one and used it during the recent festivals I was at in India. It would have turned black (with yellow turmeric and red stains) very quickly. Maybe the Kardashian sisters and their ilk would buy it, but Leica must've done its market research and concluded that it'll make money peddling this all-white model.

That said, I wonder what a "whole range of product launches" will mean. It's reported that the Fuji X-100 clobbered Leica's X1 model, and I predict that Fuji X-Pro 1 will become a favored tool for photographers who won't shell out $8000 or so to buy a M9 (or more in case of a successor). Leica is run by hard headed businessmen who look at the bottom line, and hopefully look into the future...and the future is for cameras that look, smell, cost and work like the Fuji X-Pro 1. Leica's investors know the future as well, and making white M9-P is a cute gimmick, but will not bring in the kind of cash inflow that satisfies these investors.

The range of new products may mean a successor to the M9, lenses and -if my gut feel is right- a new line of mirrorless cameras to directly compete with the Japanese products. A new M10 (improved focus, better LCD, better ISO, etc) and/or a new range of EVIL-like cameras.

That's my call.