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%.

FujiFilm X Pro-1: A Few More Quick Thoughts...

Photo © Tewfic El-Sawy- Click To Enlarge

Well, I've shot a couple of hundred images with my newly acquired FujiFilm X Pro-1 so far, and I thought I'd post a few more of my brief impressions about its performance so far.

Firstly, FujiFilm updated the firmware of the X-Pro1 and the three X-mount lenses that accompany the camera. The updates reduce the aperture 'chattering' that was experienced when using the camera. I updated yesterday, and the "chatter" was eliminated.

My pet peeve with the X Pro-1 is this: when I shoot at the 6 frames per second mode, the resulting frames do not appear in sequence on the display. The first frame appears with a small thumbnail of the remaining frames. I consulted the manual and haven't found any mention of this, or how to cancel it so that I can review the frames on the display as in other cameras. From my reading of other reviews, it seems that frames shot in continous mode are numbered differently and won't be directly accessed on playback review. FujiFilm engineers ought to come up with a solution to this crazy irritant.

Note: Magnus H. Amundsen, based in Oslo, was kind enough to tweet me and guide me to page 64 of the X Pro-1. Viewing the frames shot in continuous mode can be seen in sequence by pressing the selector down, then either right or left depending of the order chosen. Problem solved. It's counter-intuitive, and in my opinion an unnecessary step...but it works.

The other possible issue with the camera seems to be the life of a single battery charge. I read that it's sufficient for 350 images, but it certainly hasn't been the case. However, I'll keep an eye on it in the coming weeks. Its auto focus is not infallible, especially when I use the camera to shoot from the hip. It missed on a few occasions but generally speaking, it nailed a lot more than it missed. The click of the shutter is virtually imperceptible.

Something else I didn't like is the placement of the exposure compensation dial. I found that I inadvertently move it with my thumb when I shoot from the hip. I'm thinking of taping it to the -2/3 mark. I am also thinking of ordering the Thumbs Up CSEP-2 for it instead of the Fuji hand grip. I have a Thumbs Up for my M9 and it makes a huge difference.

The Fuji RAW converter (SILKYPIX) that comes with the camera is clunky and sort of primitive. Fujifilm has another so called professional converter which can be downloaded free for a 30 days trial. It's also clunky. I can't wait for Lightroom and Adobe Photoshop to soon come up with an update for the X Pro-1.

I read that some photographers find that having the battery and the SD card at the bottom of the X Pro-1 is a design flaw. However, it's identical to a Leica in that respect. Exactly.

Having now looked at a couple of my good images from the X Pro-1, I believe their quality to be really stellar. I use the Fujinon 18mm f/2.0 XF R lens which I'm very comfortable with. It's the equivalent to a 27mm and fits my style of shooting, especially in the streets of New York City. But I would prefer a lens equivalent to a 24mm f2.0. I explored the various film simulation modes it offers, and was especially impressed by its Velvia-like mode...a vivid high saturation mode. The image accompanying this post was made using that film mode.

So far so good.

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.