Leica X1 review Options

[soboyle]

For what it is worth, I use the camera strap on my G10 to help stablize it for shooting, brace elbows on ribs, pull camera away from yourself until the strap is tight against the back of your neck, and you have a very stable platform for shooting. I wear tri-focals, so that eliminates that issue for me, but if you wear glasses only for reading, then an optical viewfinder is really the best answer to flipping glasses up and down.

[EricM]

For what it is worth, I use the camera strap on my G10 to help stablize it for shooting, brace elbows on ribs, pull camera away from yourself until the strap is tight against the back of your neck, and you have a very stable platform for shooting. I wear tri-focals, so that eliminates that issue for me, but if you wear glasses only for reading, then an optical viewfinder is really the best answer to flipping glasses up and down.

That's exactly what I've learned to do with my G10, too.

As for BJL's suggestion a while back:  

I wonder if the "camera must be mashed to the head" idea has been created in response to the rise of LCD screen viewfinders?

I'll just add that I first heard that suggestion, with the use of the tucked-in arms and snugged-up neck strap, at least fifty years ago, and I have used it on every small camera (35mm or MF film, but not on 4x5 or 8x10) I've owned ever since. And I can easily see the entire scene with my left eye while the right eye is looking through the "peep hole". It may take five minutes of practice to be able to view the two images independently without closing either eye, but it sure is easier than learning Photoshop.  


Eric

[Rob C]

That's exactly what I've learned to do with my G10, too.

As for BJL's suggestion a while back:   I'll just add that I first heard that suggestion, with the use of the tucked-in arms and snugged-up neck strap, at least fifty years ago, and I have used it on every small camera (35mm or MF film, but not on 4x5 or 8x10) I've owned ever since. And I can easily see the entire scene with my left eye while the right eye is looking through the "peep hole". It may take five minutes of practice to be able to view the two images independently without closing either eye, but it sure is easier than learning Photoshop.  


Eric

I have no problem in agreeing 100%; worked a treat with all my Nikons until the first digi one - D200 - and the fact that there is a huge mental resistance to pushing the delicate plastic screen cover and all those switches into my own sweaty face! I know it has become the way things are, but a less ergo-correct place for something I can hardly imagine; makes the whole camera system feel as if it were designed for tripod usage and never to be hand-held! I suppose that the digi M Leicas now suffer the same failure. Imagine having to treat 35mm cameras with kid gloves; my original F must be laughing in its latest owner's cupboard, assuming the firing button hasn't become lost for the final time.

Rob C

[schrodingerscat]

I have no problem in agreeing 100%; worked a treat with all my Nikons until the first digi one - D200 - and the fact that there is a huge mental resistance to pushing the delicate plastic screen cover and all those switches into my own sweaty face! I know it has become the way things are, but a less ergo-correct place for something I can hardly imagine; makes the whole camera system feel as if it were designed for tripod usage and never to be hand-held! I suppose that the digi M Leicas now suffer the same failure. Imagine having to treat 35mm cameras with kid gloves; my original F must be laughing in its latest owner's cupboard, assuming the firing button hasn't become lost for the final time.

Rob C

As the M9 is design is the same as all previous M's, and the rest of their rengefinders as well, if you are right eyed most of your face is to the left of the camera.

[Rob C]

As the M9 is design is the same as all previous M's, and the rest of their rengefinders as well, if you are right eyed most of your face is to the left of the camera.

That's a good point - probably even better if you do a lot of verticals. In the late Jeanloup Sieff's last book (Taschen) he shows a fashion image where he himself also appears as a reflection and he makes a point of pointing out that he now realises he uses his thumb to release the Leica shutter in vertical shots. Perhaps not a lot of people knew that. Now, the world does.

Rob C

[Dave Millier]

...if you have to cart a tripod, what are you doing with a tiny camera anyway?

Rob C

This comment and similar I have read a lot but don't understand. Yes, one application for pocketable small cameras is for discreet handheld shooting without all the encumberances of a bag full of kit; but I can think of at least one other... lightweight field use.

My main camera is a 5D. If I want to do some "serious" landscape work, I would typically require the 5D body, possibly a backup in case of failure, and a set of lenses and of course a tripod. Now we all know that tripods are important but for that fat and lazy like me, it's always tempting to try and leave something behind to lighten he load. That tripod is awfully tempting; nasty big heavy thing...

I recently bought a Sigma DP1. This camera has too many limitations to be particularly useful as a "carry anywhere" camera (which its form factor suggests it should be good for) but it's so small and light that it is easy to carry on a long walk.... and have no excuse for leaving that essential tripod behind.

The DP1 + tripod makes a very portable hiking outfit for a specific purpose. And this is how I see the usefulness of the new breed of large sensor compacts. They can't replace SLRs for general purpose work but if the quality can match APS-C SLRS, then you have an excellent lightweight alternative to the SLR for tripod use. And frankly, when you put an SLR on a tripod, you are negating almost all of its advantages, whilst with the compacts you are negating most of their flaws.



Food for thought...

[Rob C]

And frankly, when you put an SLR on a tripod, you are negating almost all of its advantages, whilst with the compacts you are negating most of their flaws.

Food for thought...

That has got to be one of the most uninformed statements I have read - ever!

Rob C

[Rob C]

That's a good point - probably even better if you do a lot of verticals.

Wot? Nobody pick up on this yet?

Rob C

[Jim Pascoe]

This comment and similar I have read a lot but don't understand. Yes, one application for pocketable small cameras is for discreet handheld shooting without all the encumberances of a bag full of kit; but I can think of at least one other... lightweight field use.

My main camera is a 5D. If I want to do some "serious" landscape work, I would typically require the 5D body, possibly a backup in case of failure, and a set of lenses and of course a tripod. Now we all know that tripods are important but for that fat and lazy like me, it's always tempting to try and leave something behind to lighten he load. That tripod is awfully tempting; nasty big heavy thing...

I recently bought a Sigma DP1. This camera has too many limitations to be particularly useful as a "carry anywhere" camera (which its form factor suggests it should be good for) but it's so small and light that it is easy to carry on a long walk.... and have no excuse for leaving that essential tripod behind.

The DP1 + tripod makes a very portable hiking outfit for a specific purpose. And this is how I see the usefulness of the new breed of large sensor compacts. They can't replace SLRs for general purpose work but if the quality can match APS-C SLRS, then you have an excellent lightweight alternative to the SLR for tripod use. And frankly, when you put an SLR on a tripod, you are negating almost all of its advantages, whilst with the compacts you are negating most of their flaws.



Food for thought...

I have to say that I do have some sympathy with this view. Photographers generally seem to think that a tripod and heavy camera go together, and to save weight will often leave the tripod behind. I personally think better results for landscape type photography might come from taking a tripod and light camera instead. I have panasonic G1 and GF1 cameras, and paired with a Gitzo carbon tripod they make a manageable kit to walk with. For those who drive right up to the location weight is not a problem of course.

This post has been edited by Jim Pascoe: Nov 16 2009, 03:00 PM

[Alan Goldhammer]

I think the arguement for a small camera and tripod falls apart for two reasons: 1) the availability of great zoom lenses for DSLRs means that you might only take a camera with the lens and a tripod out (certainly not burdensome and a better solution than a Leica X1 with a fixed focal length lens) and/or 2) a solid back pack case can hold a body lenses and a tripod with good weight distribution. I've not had any troubles with my D300 four lenses and a tripod. It's the compact flash cards that really weigh me down!!!

[GLuijk]

I personally think better results for landscape type photography might come from taking a tripod and light camera instead.

In fact a light camera can make the tripod be lighter too, making the set much lighter.

[Bronislaus Janul...]

One of the problems with a DSLR viewfinder is few of them, outside of the top line models are 100%, whereas the compact, LCD cameras are. Mini view cameras on tripods, allowing max use of what pixels you have. I want max pixels for the future, though I think we may be on a big plateau right now.

I prefer the compact with LCD for tripod use; faster , easier, 100% view, and I can see everything, as JC pointed out for handheld use.

Also, image stabilization has advanced to the point that you can use very light tripods with very light and small cameras. With a delayed release, very sharp, even with long exposures.

This post has been edited by Bronislaus Janulis: Nov 16 2009, 11:05 PM

[BJL]

One of the problems with a DSLR viewfinder is few of them, outside of the top line models are 100%, whereas the compact, LCD cameras are. Mini view cameras on tripods, allowing max use of what pixels you have. I want max pixels for the future, though I think we may be on a big plateau right now.

I partly agree about the new option of "mini view cameras", which I will call "live view cameras" though that is really about live view vs consumer-level optical VF's, and most DSLRs offer "tripod mode live view" too. But for reasons I do not understand, the best Live View resolution is offered by the "one-eyed" EVF versions, which currently offers up to SVGA (800x600, "1.4MP") while the "two-eyed" rear screen options offer at most VGA (640x480, "920K"). So cameras like the G-1 and E-P2 offer the best 100% accurate VF in their price and weight range.

Maybe DSLR's will start offering a port for use of a hot-shoe mounted EVF like that of the E-P2 or GF-1? I would love that on something about the form factor of the Olympus E-620, or something made even smaller by having only a non-articulated LCD once the EVF can be tilted.

Or maybe we just need a large sensor compact, a tripod, and a black cloth on sunny days?

[Dave Millier]

That has got to be one of the most uninformed statements I have read - ever!

Rob C

Hello Rob

I know you are one of the "players" around here but that is a spectacularly uncalled for rude remark. You might at least take a second or two off from being superior to explain your reasoning. I can get all of that kind of stuff from DPR...

And if you think I'm irritated by your post, you're damn right!

[Rob C]

Hello Rob

I know you are one of the "players" around here but that is a spectacularly uncalled for rude remark. You might at least take a second or two off from being superior to explain your reasoning. I can get all of that kind of stuff from DPR...

And if you think I'm irritated by your post, you're damn right!

Dear Dave

Why do I think your remark is crazy?

Simply because most of the top quality professional work that is done with a single lens reflex is indeed done on a tripod. Do you imagine that photographers run around using long lenses shooting fashion, landscape, industrial, sport etc. etc. etc. without the use, at the very least, of a monopod? Do you imagine that photographers shooting architectural work don't usually have their cameras firmly attached to the strongest, most rigid tripod they can buy? Does a studio photographer shooting tethered, building up a composition and lighting arrangement, making minute adjustments for his AD or client, attempt to achieve all of that by hand-holding and thus negating the very repeatability of the process he is attempting to bring to its peak?

And if all these attributes are not of the single lens reflex camera, then of what?

That is why, and I repeat, your remark was so flawed. There is nothing whatsover 'superior' about my stance, just that I apparently know something of which you would appear to have no understanding. If that, in your mind, makes me seem 'superior' than so be it - it isn't a stance it is a relative measure in your own mind.

I never indulge in rudeness for the simple reason that I dislike it in anyone. If fact and logic fails in an argument, then I simply walk away from it. As for being a 'player' here, so is anyone else who posts. I have special dispensation from neither on high nor below; if my conduct has really displeased you then you can always refer to the folks in charge.

Rob C

[PierreVandevenne]

Simply because most of the top quality professional work that is done with a single lens reflex is indeed done on a tripod. Do you imagine that photographers run

I've attended quite a few pro photo shoots and have seen many pro photographers lie on the ground, crouch, kneel, climb etc... and very often shoot DSLRs without a tripod. Maybe a local work habit. A quick check of the many "behind the scenes" videos available on the net seems to show the practice doesn't vary much from continent to continent though...

[Jim Pascoe]

That has got to be one of the most uninformed statements I have read - ever!

Rob C

Dave Millier was referring to using cameras particularly for landscape type work out on location, and was replying to an earlier post asking why a photographer would bother with a small camera and a tripod. Indeed if one wants to keep the weight down, a Panasonic GF1 and a couple of lenses (or a DP1), combined with a tripod, would be a great combination. A Canon 5d and a couple of lenses and tripod would weigh a lot more, and where would the advantage be? Surely Dave's point was that the superior speed of autofocus, high ISO capability, and optical viewfinder of the 5D, are all pretty much negated by strapping it to a tripod. Dave was also not saying that a tripod is not necessary for an SLR. Just that if a lighter, non SLR camera is adequate for the job in hand, why not use it instead, for the type of location photography he was referring to.

Jim

[Dave Millier]

Dave Millier was referring to using cameras particularly for landscape type work out on location, and was replying to an earlier post asking why a photographer would bother with a small camera and a tripod. Indeed if one wants to keep the weight down, a Panasonic GF1 and a couple of lenses (or a DP1), combined with a tripod, would be a great combination. A Canon 5d and a couple of lenses and tripod would weigh a lot more, and where would the advantage be? Surely Dave's point was that the superior speed of autofocus, high ISO capability, and optical viewfinder of the 5D, are all pretty much negated by strapping it to a tripod. Dave was also not saying that a tripod is not necessary for an SLR. Just that if a lighter, non SLR camera is adequate for the job in hand, why not use it instead, for the type of location photography he was referring to.

Jim

Thank ypu, Jim, that was exactly point.

And, Rob, for the record I only use my 5D from atop a tripod.

[Rob C]

Thank ypu, Jim, that was exactly point.

And, Rob, for the record I only use my 5D from atop a tripod.

Glad to read that, Dave, which sort of proves the message in a circular sort of way.

;-)

Rob C

[Dave Millier]

Glad to read that, Dave, which sort of proves the message in a circular sort of way.

;-)

Rob C

At the risk of going around in circles again, I'll stick to my point: the advantages of a genuine SLR over a camera like say a GF1, are largely (not completely) negated once the cameras are on a tripod - which for me makes such small lightweight cameras worth considering for landscape work when portability is an important consideration. So, no, I'm not convinced you have proved any kind of message, circularly or otherwise.