Great video! The thing that come to mind is, at what point does a photographer feel like they are receiving diminishing returns? At what point does the incremental improvement, functions or features don’t feel worth the price tag? I believe that a professional that generates a good income and client base can more easily justify the incremental improvement. For others, especially those with financial limitations, good enough is more than enough. My takeaway from this episode is to know your art and the set of brushes that will allow you to create your masterpiece.
Another amazing and insightful video! I think it's a testament to Fujifilm's inventiveness and ability to create rich shooting experiences that the X-Pro3, a supposedly "inferior" APS-C camera, is even being compared to a camera like the Leica M11. The fact that its design, aesthetic language and usability can even be considered as a competitor to a kit 5x the cost, shows that even if the X-Pro3 is not exactly (but extremely close to being) equal to the M11 on the Creative Execution scale, it's still an insanely good value. At the end of the day, the reasons for buying either camera is so subjective and contingent on your specific needs, that value is almost impossible to quantify and that's what makes a Leica worth it for some people. It's also worth mentioning that given the crazy product cycles that cameras and other gear go through these days, with updates almost every year, a Leica may have longer "staying power" that could translate into using that camera 5x longer than using an X-Pro3 (before the next iteration comes and the inevitable GAS kicks in).
Well said, and also resale value could make the investment tip the scales a bit but again, real-world value is still a tight race. Thanks for watching Larry!
Also, I think since Fuji is going after that feel/essence that Leica has kept all this time, and that’s why the two will eternally be compared, Fuji should take some risks and make Fujinon manual focus lenses, even if they outsource them. That would be just amazing .
There's already a Voigtlander 35mm X mount manual lens and I've heard great things about it from people who own it. Definitely has a vintage look to the photos. That lens and an X-Pro 3 and you have a 'wallet friendly Leica' 😉 for about a fifth of the price.
Pair any Voightlander m mount lens with an adapter and you’ve got the coveted Leica look. Concentrate on developing your eye and the name on the camera doesn’t matter at all.
@@Seeattle Not gonna happen, that would mean an entirely new mount and camera line, and they’ve deliberately kept out of the FF battle. Hence their GFX “larger than full frame” strategy. If rumour is anything to go by, they are about to introduce a 40Mp XH2. Hence their new XT lenses having such high resolving power.
The reason why Leica works so well with the manual lenses, is the fact that they have an actual rangefinder mechanism, that was perfected during the last century. Fuji doesn't have that. Sure, their split manual focus view is good, where you're looking at a full image, and a zoomed in image right next to it, but it doesn't even come close to an actual rangefinder. It just wouldn't work, and the way I see it, it's not worth the resources when there are so many amazing AF lenses out there for the XF mount. I think the commitment should be getting rid of the LCD on the X-Pro line altogether, like an m10-d. Now that would be a message, and they sort of already did it with the hidden screen.
@@Seeattle absolutely unneeded, from a r&d viewpoint, and also, it doesn't make sense for the customers either. Yeah, full frame is great, and all that, but for most of the time, you can't tell the difference. All my clients are absolutely happy with the images they get out of my X-T3, be it weddings, or portraits, or working for a local newspaper. Not one complaint about the image quality ever.
Truly appreciated this, especially breaking down the problems with doing such A vs. B comparisons. There was one thing that came to mind for me, however: not all of us are able to get our hands on a Leica to give that tool a try, to put it through our average and daily reps, to see for ourselves whether the investment is in fact worth it. I have used a variety of cameras, film & digital, different brands, and truly love the Fuji’s I have & use for what I do. I have never touched a Leica. I have only read about or heard of their status and legendary greatness. And one thing I cannot afford to do is pay a substantial amount up front to test those waters. So while I agree with you that we can’t really know if a tool will work for us until we get our hands on them, some of us will never know because of the limitations on our access to those tools. Although I believe I can do quality work with the tools I have, I have long questioned, as your scale touched on, could I push further if I had this particular camera that folks, whose opinions and perspectives I respect highly, seem to promote? (Not saying Woe is me, by the way. I haven’t prioritized saving the funds for such an investment.) Again, truly appreciated this video. Thanks so much.
You raise a good point. I appreciate the honesty. I wonder what the market is like for Leica rentals because outside of sitting with a friend in the space, that would be the best route to get your feet wet.
A rental is how I got into Leica...I was curious about what the Leica experience was all about. I gotta say I was hooked. It changed the way I feel about cameras and what a user experience should be. That sounds like hyperbole but it's true. But I also understand why people who won't ever try Leica's often bash them, or just don't understand the value for the money. It's not everyone's cup of tea...but it's mine. They aren't worth X-times more than other cameras on paper, but they are the only camera company offering that experience and with extremely high quality products.
A very well balanced, honest comparison. I actually agree with you. I am an amateur photographer. I do not have an M11 but rather a M-D 262. I grew up shooting an M2 but only DSLR's were available when I lost my access to a darkroom and the cost of film was becoming too much for my needs. Fuji solved that for me with the X-E1. I became a Fuji addict and loved what their cameras and lenses did for my photography. I was fortunate enough to have both the money and the opportunity to purchase my digital Leica two years ago and it has replaced all my Fuji gear but what I require for wildlife and bird photography (X-T4 and 70-300mm). I think what you say is true, Leica and Fuji are VERY similar across the board. For me it was aligning the rangefinder patch, getting the shot I want, the return of my M2 film experience with digital, the learning experience, the simplicity that led to the Fujis being becoming unused and eventually sold.
It’s all about the journey and using what inspires and will get one to pick up a camera to shoot. I’ve said this once and I’ll say it again, as a former Nikon shooter, Nikon got me into photography, but when I switched to Fuji, it made me a photographer. I’ve seen street and portrait photographers use Polaroid instant cameras professionally. It’s a bit niche, but if it works for them and they make a living out of it, then great! More power. For you, if the Leica helps your workflow, inspires you, and gets the type of image you vision, then great! More power to you.
Seriously? I am sure the Leica is great but $9K for the Body and another $5K and up for each lens? It is definitely a luxury brand thing. If you can afford it then go for it but for 99.9% of the people out there it is not even an option. I did enjoy your video.
@@carlosmcse I really have the x-pro 2 over 4 years now never had any problem. Same for my X-T3. Leica M9 for example had a sensor that corroded 😂 and they did fix it for free, but not for very long. Plus leica had incredible problems with white balance and many other things. Plus the m10 doesn’t even have a video function and it still has the size of a dslr without grip. Leica is fun, but definitely not worth it. The prices should be atleast 30% cheaper retail, to be interesting
@@carlosmcse And i own a m6 and i had the M7 and M9 before I realized leica is fucking overrated. Go enjoy you photo only amazingly build leica. That is it. It is very well build. The best build in the camera world if you ask me, doesn’t change the fact that the image quality and specs are special. Because they are clearly fucking not. Even the color science is fucking overrated.
For the lens ecosystem I would say there's a huge advantage to Fuji on which you can adapt plethora of lenses including Leica's one, even Fuji have their M adapter. For the reliability and customer service, I'd say Leica. In their warranty/repair system, they clearly say (I read it on the website) that their mechanical cameras for exemple, have a 30 years spare parts availability. That's just huge. When you know you can give them your 30 year old camera and have it checked and tweaked for 300€/$ that's a huge plus. Also for the community, Leica is sometimes a bit elitist. But I find both communities to be interesting as you can always find someone to help you and you can find inspiring people.
I agree totally with your final assessment. Which camera works best for the creative process and satisfying final results of the photographer must be weighted far more than other considerations. Use cases are also important when one considers sports, wildlfe and action photography. The one wee picky point I have is taking exception to giving the lens ecosystem nod to Leica. Just about every SLR and DSLR and Leica M lens ever made, can be used with simple adapters on Fujifilm cameras as well Sony full frame cameras for that matter. Yes most must be manually focused, but so must all lenses for the Leica M11. Great video sir!
About the lens systems. I can use all Leica M mount or LTM glass (with M adapter) and Fujifilm glass on my Fujifilm cameras much easier than going the other way.. Focus peaking works much better on the Fuji cameras since they have an EVF. Just my 2 cents.. I shoot both Leica and Fujifilm and enjoy both. Great video Gajan
Real talk. Love the video. As with all many of your videos, you put stuff in context and you do it a very articulate and well-thought out manner. Very respectful to everyone’s creative/photography journey. Always looking forward to more of your content! More power. 😊
if fuji would make an Xpro4 Full Frame with the new processor and a 40-60MP sensor, I think they would be closing the gap and in some instances beating the Leica M11 in many ways. And this comes from a Leica Mainly shooter than owns an Xpro3 and X100V. The only issue would be the lack of lenses if they decide to go full frame but since they have opened their mount to third party manufacturers that shouldn't be a problem for long. as long as they have a 23, 50mm and an 24-70 equivalent that's enough for me to get one!
Uh ... NO. Quite the exact opposite. Fuji is five times better than Leica. And in recent years, Fuji has made great gains in the digital world. Fuji is king of both small format, and large format. The only place where Fuji does not have a place is in regular full frame cameras. Fuji has a 100 megapixel camera offered at a price about 4 times lower than other manufacturers offer with a 50 or 80 megapixel camera.
Great comparison. After years of laying dormant from the analog world, I jumped into the digital game. I scrutinized all options. Each brand has their positives and negatives. Canon? Cannot beat their autofocus. But I don't care for the characterless and clinical image they tend to yield. (Good for sports and nature maybe). Add to that, the molded body with menus and buttons that just don't connect me to the product. Sony and Nikon? Similar to Cannon. When it came to Fuji, I immediately felt at home with the manual dials. And then that red dot Leica was looking at me too. No question a fine tool. Considering I had just come into a small amount of money... I could have gone with Leica but the price difference was far too great. I found the XT-4 with the classic 16mm 1.4 was giving me some pretty damn good results, especially for street work. (I took it into 2 hurricanes without issue). I will admit though, sometimes I wish it was a Leica but once I get into editing, I can really get close, if not spot on to the Leica look. It usually boils down to nailing contrast and the blacks. In any event, I appreciate both cameras. You can produce good work with either.
Agree on every point. I think to even start to make this kind of comparison people need to actually USE the cameras how they are intended. Only after that do you formulate a true opinion. Everything else is meaningless conjecture until you get out there and do the damn thing.
Thank you for the balanced comparison. And Haha, always reminds me of the Pareto principle - you’ll get 80% done with 20% effort. But the the remaining 20% take 80% of effort. Translates well to camera gear, I’ve found. As a non pro shooter who doesn’t baby his gear, I have an additional metric: “how much am I f***ed if the camera gets destroyed/stolen etc” and “does this keep me from taking it out?”. Probably depends on your financial situation (and insurance), but I feel much more comfortable throwing a Fuji into my backpack than I would with a 10k camera 😉
Haha, great point. I mean, it’ll definitely hurt should anything happen to my pricier equipment but at some point you gotta just suck it up and push the gear. Like taking a 911 to a few track days 😅
Need A/F.....leica is a total fail for me on that front. It matters. A lot. The fuji is a 90 and the leica is a 70. If the Leica said Ricoh on it instead....no one would pay over 500 for it....just reality. Really well made camera that is a pita to use and has lenses that cost as much as cars....not this life is what we'd hear.
You explained very good why that 10% Gap will probably make sense for a highly skilled professional photographer, and might probably not make sense for the average amateur - besides GAS and emotional reasons. First for us ambitious amateurs it males most likely more sense to spend the money on skill development first, before it is spent for gear.
As a Fujifilm shooter; kudos on remaining unbiased and analytical in your determinations on this professional comparison. This is not an easy thing to do when removing the emotional response to shooting and focusing on the benefits from a professional standpoint. A true, and intelligent conclusion. For me, I'm not on your professional level, but, I am aspiring to save and fulfill my leica destiny. Leica will, eventually, be in my arsenal alongside my beloved Fujifilm's. Love it 😉.
YES! I think the Lamborghini will be better for me than my current Chevy Corvette. But first, I don't have the money to buy a Lambo, and second, I really don't need a Lamborghini cause my Corvette has the looks and more power than I need. 🍷Cheers!
Not so many yrs ago I bought an M240. I liked so much the concept etc that I bought a second one!! Both almost Half price new as m10 was in the market. I had 35 and 50 Summarit f2.4 ( I had md digital for some time, and I also had me digital for some time but it seems I didn’t learn from these purchases lol) and apparently I was missing the 28mm elmarit for the dream triplet! So I bought it and not only it had a crazy amount of field curvature even as small apertures (Imagine this at 60mp) but he problem was that this lens focus was totally off vs the 2 summarits. I send it to Leica and they told me all is fine, but it was not. So imagine throwing that amount of money at a system that 1. Needed calibration every 2 months (yes true while I am gentle to my cameras), could not focus with elmarit, elmarit field curvature is just crazy, and Leica thinks the triplet focus just fine at my body. Add to that 60 mp and the focus problem would be abysmal, not to mention I did not shoot bellow than 2.4. To make it even funnier I compared colors contrast etc with lumix s5 with kit lens 20-60 and I got the same punch and bite by just increasing the saturation and contrast a bit. Plus that colors of Leica m240 were often over processed and off especially at low luminance pixels. After that point I make a photo book mostly with Panasonic and possibly the most focused photo work. Leica m digital is a fundamentally faulty product. Please resize a Fuji Raw image to get e.g 85% of its linear resolution and adjust contrast and saturation and then compare with Leica. I am sure Leica (remember it comes from film) just cooks the raw . Mainstream camera manufacturers offer a better raw, colors etc base for editing. I would agree that lenses are great but sigma 35mmf2 is simply optically better than Summarit. Yes the point it’s that Summarit is small but a not so good lens gets much better is you resize to a bit smaller resolution . Summarit will get worse is 60mp body than in a 24 mp body. All it matters is the print resolution you need. Photography is not as complicated, actually it’s so simple that the constraint for keeping it simple and pursue our vision is just the mental focus at the Vision itself. Tech nowadays is so generous to us you one just pick the one that does the job. If I need a LeicaM to get inspired by the essence of photography I prefer to invest in film, and so I did with pentax 17 and Rollei 35s. Enjoy your vid! Sorry for the not so nice writing, as I am typing from my mobile and I am not native English speaker.
After a few years with nearly every ILC Fuji, APS-C and GFX, I bought the M11 (monochrome). The difference in image depth and tonality is staggering. I love the detail the GFX gives, but the files still look 2-dimensional, for lack of a better word. I never liked any of the Fuji APS-C images, they looked like iPhone images on steroids. Something cheap and plastic about them. The M11, paired with a Leica or Voigtlander lens, offers such rich and textured images, it's all about the nuance and small details. I felt like I had stepped back into an 8x10 shot, but without the dust and wet processing/scanning/spotting work. That's as close as i can describe it, a large format feeling in a small camera. Depth, detail, smoothness, sharpness, separation of tones and subject. It's all there. What's that worth? $200? $1000? $5000? That's up to you.
I have to differ on how you gave a point to the Leica on lenses. On B&H there are 150 lenses listed for M mount. The same site shows 259 for X-mount. Sure there are decades of vintage lenses you can get. Bu the Xpro can easily mount a lot of vintage glass with an adapter. I use M42 speedboosters for my collection of Takumars and Helios with a Meyer-Optik Görlitz as well. Even with new lenses from Light Lens Labs and TTartisan that falls short of what you can get for an Xpro. And those X mount lenses are ALL multicoated, with no mold, separation or oily iris blades. I do have to agree on the Fuji app. A while back I was covering a protest event at Washington Square Park, and I was trying to upload to a website in a timely fashion. No dice. I spent 30 minutes then finally had to catch the train home to use my computer. Ended up missing out on a fun group dinner because of that!
the X-Pro designers could improve its design 1000% by doing one single thing: GET RID OF THE DUMB LOOKING ANGLE ON THE DIAL DECK. That’s all they’d have to do. Why do we immediately think that the Leica M’s and even the Fuji X100’s just look better? That damn angle on the top of the X-Pros. With highly functionally designed tools we want the lines to be clean. If it isn’t there for a functional reason get rid of it! If we look at the X100V and XE-4, there is no doubt someone at Fuji gets this. I understand at Fuji each model has its own Director or VP. Maybe it’s time for somebody to retire before the Pro4 gets into prototyping.
USABILITY: If I’m at a party and even my best friend asks if he can take a picture with my camera and lens that cost me $13,000, what do you think my response will be? Could be yes or no, and you can rule out, yes. In fact, I would not take a Leica to a party where alcohol might be consumed by anyone in the room. If you own a Leica and often find yourself in that situation, get a used X-T30 and party with confidence.
Your hair is always perfect, that's the real winner IMO. loved this comparison, great video bro. I personally like the fuji myself but that's just me. Keep these videos coming man!
Вообщем игрушка для богатых)) Которые пытаются найти оправдание дорогой цены в каждом кадре. И видят это нечно)) чтобы оправдать завышенную стоимость. хехе
The only advantage I see to the Leica is its real optical focusing system. The 60mp full frame sensor won’t produce such an obvious iq difference in prints at my preferred sizes of up to 16x20 to make it meaningful for me. The X Pro 3 with the Fuji 33/1.4 at less than $3,000 with taxes makes more sense than the M11 with the Leica 50mm for $20,000 with taxes. The latter is more a piece of jewelry than anything else. My wife’s Rolex cost 3X as much as my Omega Speedmaster Professional, but the latter was chosen to go to the moon. Unless I earned my living as a photographer and could deduct its cost as a business expense, the Leica would not be a logical choice, except if I were as wealthy as the guy whose Bugatti Veyron I saw parked on the street in midtown Manhattan.
For fast moving street photography I'd suggest the Fuji X-T4 (or 100V) as that processor is better than the Pro 3 and closer to the Leica. And it's got a tiltable screen which is one big negative for all Leicas - and the reason I sold my SL. It's a great camera but for street photography the Fuji system is just better imo
Even though the Leica is a perfectly good workhorse it is, at the end of the day, an optional luxury item for enthusiasts that want one and can justify and afford the cost.
As a published photographer for 39 years and someone who has shot with many brands including Nikon, Canon, Minolta, Pentax, Bronica, Contax, Sigma, Zeiss, Hasselblad, Fuji, and Leica. I would say without a doubt that I disagree with atleast half of what you said. First when I hear the word Fanboy mentioned, Ive heard that many more times targeted toward Leica users then Fuji. Also..Fuji have a great photography community of professionals that use their gear. I wouldn’t say as you put it, they are more geared toward only average consumers, not at all. The difference is that Fuji have a wider range of affordable cameras that can appeal all the way from the average consumer up to Professionals. They have shown companies like Leica and Hasselblad that they can produce excellent Medium Format and rangefinder cameras that don’t have to sacrifice quality for price or be so god awful expensive that only rich people and high paid commercial photographers are the only ones that can afford them! So in my opinion I think Fuji is much better for the photography community over Leica..
Thanks for sharing your opinion. It don’t know if you changed my mind but I think I should revisit this subject in 2024. But more importantly… did you make it to the end of the video? None of this matters lol. Ultimately you pick the tool for the job (or the joy) and forget about the noise. The video itself is commentary on how arbitrary these types of conversations are. As a published photographer with all that experience, I’m sure you would agree 🤷🏾♂️
A beautiful round-up, and I totally agree about your exponential degree observations of price versus certain qualities. It applies in almost aspects of life and the individual's passion and hobbies - Cars, Boats, Cameras, Fancy Chef Ovens - at some point that last 10%, does it matter to the individual? Maybe. Want it? But rest assured - You'll be $paying$ for it..
Love this review! You hit on the key topic...what tool gets you to where you want to go! Price with Leica's is a factor, but that aside Leica makes wonderful cameras. I've been looking to go back to an M body from my Q. This video makes me want an M even more. I rented an M10P recently and it's just better for me in so many ways. I used to own a Pro-3 and a 100V as well....this may sound weird but most cameras have too many features for me. I love the minimalist shooting experience Leica provides.
Anyone with two hits of knowledge about optics, and the mechanics of a hand made camera would know that above a certain level of quality the improvemets are incremetal while the price shoots up exponentially. I am not getting nto the stupid argument of whether a Leica any Leica is worth the asking price, but we all have a brain that hopefully functions. And that shpuld tell us if a Leica is the right camera for us or not. All these debates are just superfluous, unless you just want to do a bit of Leica bashing just to views. Leica, any Leica M camera, film or digital is not the right camera for o er 99% of the photographets. That is my opinion, but Leicas are not maerketed at that 99% but the 1%. Photography is a craft, as well as scince, skill and art. That is whete the weakness of the majority of modern photographers lies. Sorry to be honest.
Good point. Photographers arguing about cameras is as good as poets arguing about pens. Tools are tools, no tool will prevent great art work. Best art was created before the industrial revolution with traditional crafts, this should say something.
Great video---with one exception: saying that the Leica lens ecosystem is close, much less equal to or better than Fuji, is laughable. If you are strictly considering native lenses, it would be different (as well as unfair/biased), but one of the great features of the X mount is that you not only have the good (albeit limited selection) native lenses, but can get lens adapters for many other brands, _including_ Leica M. And some Leica lenses (like Summilux) will actually perform _better_ on the Fuji than on a Leica, due to the crop factor. And you can even get adapters that support auto focus for the Fuji to use Nikon and Canon EF lenses. (That is in addition to the literally hundreds or possibly thousands of other lenses that you can choose from with manual focus.) So the lens category is really no contest.
Great video Gajan! Applying your scorecard, in addition the creative vision scale, has me contemplating the gear I would use myself plus what would be best for my wife. I bought her a rugged, waterproof camera that goes unused. The camera is easy enough to use but she is technophobic, so she doesn't know how transfer the images to her phone, nor does she have any desire to learn how to do that. But she likes taking pictures and has a good eye for composition. so to maximize her creative vision I need to find system that has extremely simple connectivity or get her the best cell phone camera I can find.
I agree on all point except lens eco system since fuji can use m mount lenses with adaptors and have a bigger acsess to adapted lenses. The fuji also use m lenses really good since those adaptors are small and almost makes the lens looks native..
Expensive not necessarily better, in this case fujifilm sells better than leica. Imagine just imagine fujifilm make their cameras to the highest quality like leica. Do you think leica is better than fujifilm?. Yes it’s possible, but fujifilm want’s their cameras accessible to mere mortal. Unlike leica with old technology and note, very old autofocusing system. Yes image quality is better with leica but when autofocus miss a lot then what’s the use of image quality. Hey Gajan you can’t afford leica , so just dream brother it’s free.
I would add one more category: availability/portability. This would not only apply to bulk but also to risk. The M11 and the X-Pro3 seem to be about the same size. But there are places I would take the Fuji rather than the Leica because of the risk factor.
I love the Xpro3 and the Leica is really nice, but is there any tabngible way of comparing cost increase to image quality and value? No. It's just an expensive hobby for most people looking at camparison videos. Since we're on the topic, the X1D is "better", whatever that word means. If it makes you happy, mayeb it's worth 1000000x the price, up to you
Bruh, you rock that Tony Northrup hair...lol Seriously though, nice video. I use Fuji for digital, and also use Leica lenses on sometimes. I shoot an old Leica M2 for film.
Good vid. I wonder if this is it worth it discussion happens in other spaces? Like are there people commenting on vids about Lambos saying a BMW 3 series is just as good and nothing justifies the price? I mean if you want something, have the money, and it's worth it to you then I say go for it. I find most of this whole convo silly honestly.
Man, I'm not in the market for either and probably won't be for a while (if ever) and I find myself sitting here watching till the end. Gajan, you make great videos man, appreciate you brother!
Back in the days of film I was heavy into R's and M's. Not so much for the body's (quite frankly I had more mechanical problems with the R's than I ever had with Canon and Nikon). But, the glass... Man, that glass was something else. Jump forward to digital... I can't do it. With PS and other post processing it's totally subjective. Maybe if I had WAY deeper pockets than I do I could justify it, but, with retirement looming it simply isn't worth the small gains (again subjective) "to me".
You’re right. I figure if we’re entertaining this conversation then we’ve already overlooked price. But in the long run, none of this matters. You invest in the tool that makes the journey best for you.
"The M11 is better, but not significantly better." When we take into consideration both camera's sensors - 60mp at 24x36mm size for the M11 and 26mp at 23.5 x 15.6mm for the X-Pro3 - the choice becomes clear, particularly for those who want to make exhibit quality prints.
No… for prints you should really go for a GFX… really! Nothing, save for Hasselblad and PhaseOne (sell a car or house to finance either system), compares to the print quality of images from the GFX
I would say your assessment of lens ecosystem was misjudged. Yes, there’s a lineage of lenses going back many years… but because you have that many to choose from, doesn’t mean they’re always usable. They might need calibrating, or the cameras rangefinder calibrating to match a specific lens. Such specific focusing mechanisms come with such problems. A mirrorless system like the Fuji has by and far more lens options. Setting aside the native X mount, you can adapt literally any lens from nearly every manufacturer going back for decades on such a system… let alone all the third party new options now available. I know you can do this on Leica also, flange distance permitting, not so much so on a system like Fuji or a Sony etc. Interesting comparison though.
Lens ecosystem to me is natively, which mount has more options and the variety across those options. In that regard, the Leica wins out. Easily. But I should say, it doesn’t really matter. What really matters is which has the options you need for your work 🤷🏽♂️
What's funny is that I cut that piece out of this video. I had a 5 minute segment updating the situation but cut it out to streamline this video. I'm going to update the comment of that video with what happened but in short, they went above and beyond and took care of the issue as far as I can tell.
Thanks for that reply. I was going to get an XPro3 but was scared off by your experience and then finding many more folks with similar problems. Eager to hear the resolution of this disappointing scenario.
I'd been a Fuji user ( and still am) but bought the Leica T after watching a Mattias Burling video at a bargain price (for less than X100F money) and used it. I began to understand the Leica ethos - clean, elegant and reliable. Sooner or later I'll pick up a q2--- I'll still continue to use and love my x t-3, and x-e3 but sometimes I want what one gives, sometimes the other. Btw Kudos on your bookcase- Ed Catmull-- Creativity Inc, Gordon Parks-the new tide and Magnum Contact Sheets-- all essential. You should do a video on your books sometime.
Thanks for watching and yes, I hope to diverge from the review content soon. To be frank, the goal is to leverage these gear videos to get to 50K, while doing in with our style and detail, then begin doing more experimental videos that are personal to me. I appreciate you noticing.
Great video. If I was going to watch one of these Leica vs Fuji, it’s gonna be yours. One could say “you’re a more trusted source” 😁 The X-Pro 3 is objectively a better camera and the M11 is subjectively better depending on your needs and wants. Leicas are extremely overpriced for what they offer as utilitarian photographic tools, and maybe not so as creative and enjoyable tools. Leica’s kept the same feel and method of the operation of their cameras, while everyone else turned their cameras into computers with lenses. The result is that the Leica method is now desired and sought after, and it’s acquired prestige has allowed it to be this overpriced luxury niche entity. Fuji brouhgt the analog and less computer operation feel to the masses, at a more reasonable and affordable price. That’s why the comparisons will never end. The M11 or any Leica camera are not better than Fuji cameras (flagship), except if we’re talking using a rangefinder and manual focus and or zone focus. If you want to do documentary work, they’re both small, portable and nimble. It just depends how you prefer to work. Image quality: I think you as a working pro-photographer can tell/ are more qualified to say, as you’ll probably view the images on bigger and better displays than iPad youtube app, phone or computer screen. Maybe you’ll see large prints? At that point though, in a studio setting etc, isn’t that when you’d just go medium format to maximize that iq? GFX100S, etc?
I appreciate the kind words and thank you for sharing. I mean, it’s a great time to be a creative with this much choice on the market. Would be interesting to compare the IQ of M11 and GFX in a future video. Maybe not a dedicated one, but at least to discuss it in some capacity.
The answer is easy. No it's not. No matter what you say about opinion or creative gap or what inspires you, factually speaking the M is not 5 times better than the fuji xpro 3. Not by any metric other than price. Image quality, the most subjective item or biggest difference between the 2 isn't a 5x difference. This is the case with most consumer items. The "top of the line" is always suffering from extreme diminishing returns and is not X times better than the alternative brand. I cycle, and the top of the line road bike can cost a person anywhere from 12,000 to 15,000, but those bikes are not 5 times better than mid range 3,000 bikes. For racers and professionals, people who NEED those seconds of extra speed, the price is justified. It's also justified for people who simply have the money and want that extra speed, either for their own improvement or for the pride of owning such an item. Anyone can justify the leica's 5x price, or even 10x price over other cameras, either by quoting historical value, fun, comfort, or that it's the only real rangefinder. Whether or not it's 5 or 10x better though is not an argument. It is not.
To say the answer is easy and then proceed to type 500 words is wild 😅 The answer is even easier: none of this matters. Which is exactly what I said at the end of the video.
@@GajanBalan Yeah I was just trying to cover my bases and explain myself instead of just typing a few words that could and would be misconstrued. I think it matters to people who desire a certain amount of value from 2 products that are for the same purpose.
How many photography influencers will talk about a logarithmic scale to measure tools? 👍👍👍 For the question of whether the 10pt gap is worth the 5x price, it is helpful to consider the scores relative to the typical camera and typical photographer. It is also important to consider the overall value a person seeks to get as a photographer. If the typical score is 65, then the X-Pro3 and M11 are 20 and 30 pts higher, making the 10pt gap a 50% increase. The value can be measured by either paid work, 'implied' paid work as images/prints sold to ourselves, or intangible value like creative pleasure. If that is $20k over the life of the X-Pro3, then the 50% increase for the M11 seems worth the cost. Finally, while the "creative execution" scale is logarithmic, the "product revenue" scale may be exponential. An image from the lower scoring camera might be worth $50 while the other one might be $500. While this seems a bit contrived, since everyone has a camera in their pocket, there is a sense of only wanting to pay for 'exceptional' images, made with high creative execution.
@@GajanBalan Haha, I saw that too. I also meant to edit my comment with, "This is mostly me writing this for me to read." I have used a similar thought process when considering more expensive lenses. And I need to sell more prints...
Very cool video. I like how you laid things out and gave your opinions based on your experiences. I do agree with pretty much all your points, the pros and cons of each brand. While I can see and understand the value a Leica may provide for others, for me and my work, it is not worth the money, and provides zero benefit over what my X-Pro3 offers. Keep up the good work!
I think if you did this review with a Fujifilm xt5 that functionally it's probably a better camera than the Leica understand where you were coming from it's like driving a BMW and say driving a really nice car the BMW is going to feel nicer and give you that buzz but it's still gets you from A to B is the 8B just as important yes it is is that comparison because that's where I see this video and that's not a criticism in reality though most people can't afford a lieca
@@GajanBalan yeah totally agree if you lined up a lot of cameras side-by-side and then took photos with all the different cameras it would be very difficult to pick which camera to which photo of Off and said this. If you hand a half decent camera to professional photographer I'm in that semi professional mode, well professional, but I don't have a big ego about it. You can pretty much pass me any camera and I'm gonna be out take a good photo with it so I know what I'm doing thank you for the clarification though.
@@GajanBalan I'm just curious =))), GFX is 5X better than leica M11 =)), I don't care who wins. I just watched your video and I already know that leica wins for sure when compared to xpro3, but the meaning of the video is how far is the difference between the winners and the losers, it makes me curious. You did a great episode.
Great lineup. I agree on service and support. Leica sadly lacks a pro-support program (Fuji has FPS), and some repairs require you to send the camera to Germany and some will take months to repair. That definitely needs to be improved. Otherwise Leica is a great camera.
Really great video. My main concern about the Leica M series is the undertone assumption that the camera WILL need to be sent back for regular maintenance. At the price, regular servicing should be designed out, so is the legendary Leica reliability only propped up by the willingness of users to accept this further hit to the wallet? This is something generally not heard about the Fuji unless there is a fault.
I think what adds to this is that you could have an incredibly old Leica (except for an M8 and that unique sensor) and still have it serviced whereas that isn't commonplace with Fujifilm.
@@GajanBalan fair comment, but if either of these two cameras was to be the only camera, with which you had to complete all your photography, no second bodies, no other systems? How might you revisit the point of value for money?
Fair enough, gutted for you that you've had this shutter release issue, I haven't with mine - I always use 5fps never single, not sure if that's relevant @@GajanBalan
When you get into great products like Fuji and Leica, additional spending gets you smaller improvements. Anyone who buys luxury goods knows this. A camera that costs five times as much isn’t going to be five times better. That’s just not how it works. The last increments of quality cost a fortune.
Thanks for the comparison video. I shoot a Leica M10 digital rangefinder with the following lenses: Leica 21mm f/1.4 Summilux-M Zeiss 35mm f/1.4 Distagon ZM Leica 90mm f/2 Summicron I also shoot a Fuji X-Pro2 digital mirrorless with the following Fujinon lenses: 56mm f/1.2 23mm f/1.4 16mm f/1.4 16-55mm f/2.8 50-140mm f/2.8 If I could select two features from my M10 and add them to my X-Pro2, it would be the rangefinder manual focusing and the ability to produce high quality 24x36mm images with the M-mount lenses I already own. If I could select two features from my X-Pro2 and add them to my M10, it would be the reasonable price and twin memory card slots.
Build quality, materials and the 'experience' are what makes Leica worth more. A lot more? Maybe not. But there are good reasons for it to be more expensive. And this comes from a Fuji shooter for over a decade, and a user of Leica. I do miss autofocus sometimes though!
Have you used leica cameras especially the m series extensively? I was a skeptic until i tried shooting with them, nothing really comparable with the shooting experience and the files they produce so their price is somewhat justifiable. Also don’t forget their lenses, nothing renders like those summiluxes really.
Community? That's a bit unfair. Fujifilm is a Japanese company. Japanese are by nature unwilling to take strong stands on almost anything, which, strangely, is in itself a strong stand. The stand is the belief that it's wrong to alienate others or make them feel uncomfortable. Japanese stick to this philosophy to a fault. If you talked to people at Fuji who are Japanese and they wanted to take a stronger stand in some way I'd be interested to know what that is specifically. If these individuals are Japanese they are probably radical Japanese.
To establish my comment: a) Credentials: Into photography since Xmas 1958. Darkroom since 1968, Color printing 1972. Expert in 35mm, 120, 4x5. Darkroomer from 1968 to 2016. On digital since 2009 but hybrid since 2004. Still shooting film *and of course digital* but abandoned chemical printing (formerly known as enlarging) when I found that Epson & Ilford had beaten Kodak (and Ilford) to fine prints. b) Leica: My first experience was with my father's IIIf in 1967 when I ended picking his Retina IIIc for an European vacation. Next time was after my father's demise when I was bestowed his IIIf, Retina IIIc (small c) and his favorite, a Canonet QL/9. Next, M6+Summicron 35, M2, MP, M10. c) Actual: Septuagenary; shoots regularly, film, digital... process C41 and B&W -- pretty experienced with both, kept a darkroom from my colset while college student to grandfather today. Shoot *daily* even if it's garbage. d) Opinion: Leica is a passion, a gut feeling, a flavor, a style, a snob position. I love them, they have a simple, unobstrussive, intuitive design. Probably the only thing you need to learn is loading the film (digitals excepted). However, once you accept that no one knows what brush brand or style DaVinci used, Fuji offers a working or amateur photographer much better *tools,* you might say for studio, street, or simply vacationing; then at a fraction the price and 95% the quality. Take it from a LeicaLover; been to solms BTW, that's *NOT* a large factory.
I gave my Q2 to my training assistant to take some shots of me and some pupils. I set it on touch and focus release! Simples! She just touched my face the LCDscreen. It focused and shot in a second. Great feature.
Not sure what you mean by community. No examples offered to make it clear. My first thought was that Fuji pioneered firmware updates that were not just bug fixes, but added functionality. Leica's sometimes my way or the highway attitude is the opposite of commmunity in my opinion.. Your final argument for the specific need of the photographer is the most persuasive.
Two different Cameras.. Full frame vs APSC.. One is almost a work of ART. The other is trying to always live in the shadow of the other. TWO different cameras, conjure two different mindsets...
This is reminiscent of the recent video by Hugh from 3 Blind Men and an Elephant, who also shoots Leica and Fuji, where in talking about Fuji’s new 33mm, he thinks Fuji is at an inflection point where they have to up the resolution of their XT line to keep up with all the small mirrorless full frame cameras, which are no longer large clunky DSLRs. Basically he thinks their new lenses are so good they can out-resolve the sensor, even go head-to-head with some Lecia glass,and frankly that might be intentional on their part. The XH2 will be announced soon, after all, and may sport Sony’s new 43Mp aps-c sensor (though FujiRumours reckon it will be a 40-megapixel sensor).
When you said community I thought you were referring to exclusively the community of people that use and talk about the cameras rather than the marketing culture
No disrespect intended, but I love a 23-minute comparison Leica-Fuji video that includes the observation that "many of these comparisons are ultimately bullshit." FWIW, I am doing the Fuji-Leica comparison (X100V vs. Q) right now.
Customer support from Leica is terrible. You pay 5 times the price of most other cameras. And you wait 5 times as long, when send in for repair or adjustments. Right now a small repair takes 2-3 months in Wetzlar. This is not acceptable....
Great video!
The thing that come to mind is, at what point does a photographer feel like they are receiving diminishing returns? At what point does the incremental improvement, functions or features don’t feel worth the price tag? I believe that a professional that generates a good income and client base can more easily justify the incremental improvement. For others, especially those with financial limitations, good enough is more than enough. My takeaway from this episode is to know your art and the set of brushes that will allow you to create your masterpiece.
Well said, thank you for sharing 🙏🏾
Another amazing and insightful video!
I think it's a testament to Fujifilm's inventiveness and ability to create rich shooting experiences that the X-Pro3, a supposedly "inferior" APS-C camera, is even being compared to a camera like the Leica M11. The fact that its design, aesthetic language and usability can even be considered as a competitor to a kit 5x the cost, shows that even if the X-Pro3 is not exactly (but extremely close to being) equal to the M11 on the Creative Execution scale, it's still an insanely good value.
At the end of the day, the reasons for buying either camera is so subjective and contingent on your specific needs, that value is almost impossible to quantify and that's what makes a Leica worth it for some people.
It's also worth mentioning that given the crazy product cycles that cameras and other gear go through these days, with updates almost every year, a Leica may have longer "staying power" that could translate into using that camera 5x longer than using an X-Pro3 (before the next iteration comes and the inevitable GAS kicks in).
Well said, and also resale value could make the investment tip the scales a bit but again, real-world value is still a tight race. Thanks for watching Larry!
Also, I think since Fuji is going after that feel/essence that Leica has kept all this time, and that’s why the two will eternally be compared, Fuji should take some risks and make Fujinon manual focus lenses, even if they outsource them. That would be just amazing .
There's already a Voigtlander 35mm X mount manual lens and I've heard great things about it from people who own it. Definitely has a vintage look to the photos. That lens and an X-Pro 3 and you have a 'wallet friendly Leica' 😉 for about a fifth of the price.
Pair any Voightlander m mount lens with an adapter and you’ve got the coveted Leica look. Concentrate on developing your eye and the name on the camera doesn’t matter at all.
@@Seeattle Not gonna happen, that would mean an entirely new mount and camera line, and they’ve deliberately kept out of the FF battle. Hence their GFX “larger than full frame” strategy. If rumour is anything to go by, they are about to introduce a 40Mp XH2. Hence their new XT lenses having such high resolving power.
The reason why Leica works so well with the manual lenses, is the fact that they have an actual rangefinder mechanism, that was perfected during the last century. Fuji doesn't have that. Sure, their split manual focus view is good, where you're looking at a full image, and a zoomed in image right next to it, but it doesn't even come close to an actual rangefinder. It just wouldn't work, and the way I see it, it's not worth the resources when there are so many amazing AF lenses out there for the XF mount. I think the commitment should be getting rid of the LCD on the X-Pro line altogether, like an m10-d. Now that would be a message, and they sort of already did it with the hidden screen.
@@Seeattle absolutely unneeded, from a r&d viewpoint, and also, it doesn't make sense for the customers either. Yeah, full frame is great, and all that, but for most of the time, you can't tell the difference. All my clients are absolutely happy with the images they get out of my X-T3, be it weddings, or portraits, or working for a local newspaper. Not one complaint about the image quality ever.
Truly appreciated this, especially breaking down the problems with doing such A vs. B comparisons.
There was one thing that came to mind for me, however: not all of us are able to get our hands on a Leica to give that tool a try, to put it through our average and daily reps, to see for ourselves whether the investment is in fact worth it. I have used a variety of cameras, film & digital, different brands, and truly love the Fuji’s I have & use for what I do. I have never touched a Leica. I have only read about or heard of their status and legendary greatness. And one thing I cannot afford to do is pay a substantial amount up front to test those waters. So while I agree with you that we can’t really know if a tool will work for us until we get our hands on them, some of us will never know because of the limitations on our access to those tools.
Although I believe I can do quality work with the tools I have, I have long questioned, as your scale touched on, could I push further if I had this particular camera that folks, whose opinions and perspectives I respect highly, seem to promote? (Not saying Woe is me, by the way. I haven’t prioritized saving the funds for such an investment.)
Again, truly appreciated this video. Thanks so much.
You raise a good point. I appreciate the honesty. I wonder what the market is like for Leica rentals because outside of sitting with a friend in the space, that would be the best route to get your feet wet.
A rental is how I got into Leica...I was curious about what the Leica experience was all about. I gotta say I was hooked. It changed the way I feel about cameras and what a user experience should be. That sounds like hyperbole but it's true. But I also understand why people who won't ever try Leica's often bash them, or just don't understand the value for the money. It's not everyone's cup of tea...but it's mine. They aren't worth X-times more than other cameras on paper, but they are the only camera company offering that experience and with extremely high quality products.
Best bet is to rent unfortunately.
A very well balanced, honest comparison. I actually agree with you.
I am an amateur photographer. I do not have an M11 but rather a M-D 262. I grew up shooting an M2 but only DSLR's were available when I lost my access to a darkroom and the cost of film was becoming too much for my needs. Fuji solved that for me with the X-E1. I became a Fuji addict and loved what their cameras and lenses did for my photography. I was fortunate enough to have both the money and the opportunity to purchase my digital Leica two years ago and it has replaced all my Fuji gear but what I require for wildlife and bird photography (X-T4 and 70-300mm).
I think what you say is true, Leica and Fuji are VERY similar across the board. For me it was aligning the rangefinder patch, getting the shot I want, the return of my M2 film experience with digital, the learning experience, the simplicity that led to the Fujis being becoming unused and eventually sold.
I appreciate you sharing this Peter. Thanks for watching.
It’s all about the journey and using what inspires and will get one to pick up a camera to shoot. I’ve said this once and I’ll say it again, as a former Nikon shooter, Nikon got me into photography, but when I switched to Fuji, it made me a photographer. I’ve seen street and portrait photographers use Polaroid instant cameras professionally. It’s a bit niche, but if it works for them and they make a living out of it, then great! More power. For you, if the Leica helps your workflow, inspires you, and gets the type of image you vision, then great! More power to you.
Well said Daniel. Thanks for watching.
Seriously? I am sure the Leica is great but $9K for the Body and another $5K and up for each lens? It is definitely a luxury brand thing. If you can afford it then go for it but for 99.9% of the people out there it is not even an option. I did enjoy your video.
The best part is that his customers wont be able to tell if the pics were taken with a Leica or an iphone😅
@@jaegerschtulmann it definitely can. Ever heard of colorscience? Dynamic range, lowlight performance, raw files that can actually be used
@@jaegerschtulmann wdym phones produce shit photos, none of them take great pics. They’re still large differences with phones and mirrorless/ dslr
@@carlosmcse I really have the x-pro 2 over 4 years now never had any problem. Same for my X-T3. Leica M9 for example had a sensor that corroded 😂 and they did fix it for free, but not for very long. Plus leica had incredible problems with white balance and many other things. Plus the m10 doesn’t even have a video function and it still has the size of a dslr without grip. Leica is fun, but definitely not worth it. The prices should be atleast 30% cheaper retail, to be interesting
@@carlosmcse And i own a m6 and i had the M7 and M9 before I realized leica is fucking overrated. Go enjoy you photo only amazingly build leica. That is it. It is very well build. The best build in the camera world if you ask me, doesn’t change the fact that the image quality and specs are special. Because they are clearly fucking not. Even the color science is fucking overrated.
For the lens ecosystem I would say there's a huge advantage to Fuji on which you can adapt plethora of lenses including Leica's one, even Fuji have their M adapter.
For the reliability and customer service, I'd say Leica. In their warranty/repair system, they clearly say (I read it on the website) that their mechanical cameras for exemple, have a 30 years spare parts availability. That's just huge. When you know you can give them your 30 year old camera and have it checked and tweaked for 300€/$ that's a huge plus.
Also for the community, Leica is sometimes a bit elitist. But I find both communities to be interesting as you can always find someone to help you and you can find inspiring people.
Yes, Leica has a very good service. But only if you can wait a long time for repairs and it is quite costly compared to other companies.
Just keep in mind a photo from a phone can be better than a image from the leica. Your best tool is the eyes.
I agree totally with your final assessment. Which camera works best for the creative process and satisfying final results of the photographer must be weighted far more than other considerations. Use cases are also important when one considers sports, wildlfe and action photography. The one wee picky point I have is taking exception to giving the lens ecosystem nod to Leica. Just about every SLR and DSLR and Leica M lens ever made, can be used with simple adapters on Fujifilm cameras as well Sony full frame cameras for that matter. Yes most must be manually focused, but so must all lenses for the Leica M11. Great video sir!
Well said. Thanks for watching!
About the lens systems. I can use all Leica M mount or LTM glass (with M adapter) and Fujifilm glass on my Fujifilm cameras much easier than going the other way.. Focus peaking works much better on the Fuji cameras since they have an EVF. Just my 2 cents.. I shoot both Leica and Fujifilm and enjoy both.
Great video Gajan
That's a fair point. Thanks for watching!
@@GajanBalan I'm sure sensor size may play a role in how the images look with these lenses...
I'm agreeing with Gajan mostly, but not sure having 1000 50mm options is better than covering an equivalent of 12mm to 600mm...
Real talk. Love the video. As with all many of your videos, you put stuff in context and you do it a very articulate and well-thought out manner. Very respectful to everyone’s creative/photography journey. Always looking forward to more of your content! More power. 😊
I appreciate that, thank you ✌🏾
if fuji would make an Xpro4 Full Frame with the new processor and a 40-60MP sensor, I think they would be closing the gap and in some instances beating the Leica M11 in many ways. And this comes from a Leica Mainly shooter than owns an Xpro3 and X100V. The only issue would be the lack of lenses if they decide to go full frame but since they have opened their mount to third party manufacturers that shouldn't be a problem for long. as long as they have a 23, 50mm and an 24-70 equivalent that's enough for me to get one!
Uh ... NO. Quite the exact opposite. Fuji is five times better than Leica.
And in recent years, Fuji has made great gains in the digital world. Fuji is king of both small format, and large format.
The only place where Fuji does not have a place is in regular full frame cameras.
Fuji has a 100 megapixel camera offered at a price about 4 times lower than other manufacturers offer with a 50 or 80 megapixel camera.
Lets see your work, Scott.
Great comparison. After years of laying dormant from the analog world, I jumped into the digital game. I scrutinized all options. Each brand has their positives and negatives. Canon? Cannot beat their autofocus. But I don't care for the characterless and clinical image they tend to yield. (Good for sports and nature maybe). Add to that, the molded body with menus and buttons that just don't connect me to the product. Sony and Nikon? Similar to Cannon.
When it came to Fuji, I immediately felt at home with the manual dials. And then that red dot Leica was looking at me too. No question a fine tool. Considering I had just come into a small amount of money... I could have gone with Leica but the price difference was far too great. I found the XT-4 with the classic 16mm 1.4 was giving me some pretty damn good results, especially for street work. (I took it into 2 hurricanes without issue). I will admit though, sometimes I wish it was a Leica but once I get into editing, I can really get close, if not spot on to the Leica look. It usually boils down to nailing contrast and the blacks. In any event, I appreciate both cameras. You can produce good work with either.
Agree on every point. I think to even start to make this kind of comparison people need to actually USE the cameras how they are intended. Only after that do you formulate a true opinion. Everything else is meaningless conjecture until you get out there and do the damn thing.
I agree. It's often easy to spot the people that haven't had the hands-on experience. Thanks for watching brother!
Oh... Alex! :) I am so sorry , Alex, but only M11 owners are allowed to comment here. #StayFrosty
Thank you for the balanced comparison. And Haha, always reminds me of the Pareto principle - you’ll get 80% done with 20% effort. But the the remaining 20% take 80% of effort. Translates well to camera gear, I’ve found. As a non pro shooter who doesn’t baby his gear, I have an additional metric: “how much am I f***ed if the camera gets destroyed/stolen etc” and “does this keep me from taking it out?”. Probably depends on your financial situation (and insurance), but I feel much more comfortable throwing a Fuji into my backpack than I would with a 10k camera 😉
Haha, great point. I mean, it’ll definitely hurt should anything happen to my pricier equipment but at some point you gotta just suck it up and push the gear. Like taking a 911 to a few track days 😅
Need A/F.....leica is a total fail for me on that front. It matters. A lot. The fuji is a 90 and the leica is a 70. If the Leica said Ricoh on it instead....no one would pay over 500 for it....just reality. Really well made camera that is a pita to use and has lenses that cost as much as cars....not this life is what we'd hear.
You explained very good why that 10% Gap will probably make sense for a highly skilled professional photographer, and might probably not make sense for the average amateur - besides GAS and emotional reasons. First for us ambitious amateurs it males most likely more sense to spend the money on skill development first, before it is spent for gear.
As a Fujifilm shooter; kudos on remaining unbiased and analytical in your determinations on this professional comparison.
This is not an easy thing to do when removing the emotional response to shooting and focusing on the benefits from a professional standpoint.
A true, and intelligent conclusion.
For me, I'm not on your professional level, but, I am aspiring to save and fulfill my leica destiny. Leica will, eventually, be in my arsenal alongside my beloved Fujifilm's.
Love it 😉.
YES! I think the Lamborghini will be better for me than my current Chevy Corvette. But first, I don't have the money to buy a Lambo, and second, I really don't need a Lamborghini cause my Corvette has the looks and more power than I need. 🍷Cheers!
lol
Not so many yrs ago I bought an M240. I liked so much the concept etc that I bought a second one!! Both almost Half price new as m10 was in the market. I had 35 and 50 Summarit f2.4 ( I had md digital for some time, and I also had me digital for some time but it seems I didn’t learn from these purchases lol) and apparently I was missing the 28mm elmarit for the dream triplet! So I bought it and not only it had a crazy amount of field curvature even as small apertures (Imagine this at 60mp) but he problem was that this lens focus was totally off vs the 2 summarits. I send it to Leica and they told me all is fine, but it was not. So imagine throwing that amount of money at a system that 1. Needed calibration every 2 months (yes true while I am gentle to my cameras), could not focus with elmarit, elmarit field curvature is just crazy, and Leica thinks the triplet focus just fine at my body. Add to that 60 mp and the focus problem would be abysmal, not to mention I did not shoot bellow than 2.4. To make it even funnier I compared colors contrast etc with lumix s5 with kit lens 20-60 and I got the same punch and bite by just increasing the saturation and contrast a bit. Plus that colors of Leica m240 were often over processed and off especially at low luminance pixels. After that point I make a photo book mostly with Panasonic and possibly the most focused photo work. Leica m digital is a fundamentally faulty product. Please resize a Fuji Raw image to get e.g 85% of its linear resolution and adjust contrast and saturation and then compare with Leica. I am sure Leica (remember it comes from film) just cooks the raw . Mainstream camera manufacturers offer a better raw, colors etc base for editing. I would agree that lenses are great but sigma 35mmf2 is simply optically better than Summarit. Yes the point it’s that Summarit is small but a not so good lens gets much better is you resize to a bit smaller resolution . Summarit will get worse is 60mp body than in a 24 mp body. All it matters is the print resolution you need. Photography is not as complicated, actually it’s so simple that the constraint for keeping it simple and pursue our vision is just the mental focus at the Vision itself.
Tech nowadays is so generous to us you one just pick the one that does the job. If I need a LeicaM to get inspired by the essence of photography I prefer to invest in film, and so I did with pentax 17 and Rollei 35s. Enjoy your vid! Sorry for the not so nice writing, as I am typing from my mobile and I am not native English speaker.
After a few years with nearly every ILC Fuji, APS-C and GFX, I bought the M11 (monochrome). The difference in image depth and tonality is staggering.
I love the detail the GFX gives, but the files still look 2-dimensional, for lack of a better word.
I never liked any of the Fuji APS-C images, they looked like iPhone images on steroids. Something cheap and plastic about them.
The M11, paired with a Leica or Voigtlander lens, offers such rich and textured images, it's all about the nuance and small details. I felt like I had stepped back into an 8x10 shot, but without the dust and wet processing/scanning/spotting work. That's as close as i can describe it, a large format feeling in a small camera. Depth, detail, smoothness, sharpness, separation of tones and subject. It's all there.
What's that worth? $200? $1000? $5000? That's up to you.
I have to differ on how you gave a point to the Leica on lenses.
On B&H there are 150 lenses listed for M mount.
The same site shows 259 for X-mount. Sure there are decades of vintage lenses you can get. Bu the Xpro can easily mount a lot of vintage glass with an adapter. I use M42 speedboosters for my collection of Takumars and Helios with a Meyer-Optik Görlitz as well.
Even with new lenses from Light Lens Labs and TTartisan that falls short of what you can get for an Xpro. And those X mount lenses are ALL multicoated, with no mold, separation or oily iris blades.
I do have to agree on the Fuji app.
A while back I was covering a protest event at Washington Square Park, and I was trying to upload to a website in a timely fashion.
No dice. I spent 30 minutes then finally had to catch the train home to use my computer.
Ended up missing out on a fun group dinner because of that!
the X-Pro designers could improve its design 1000% by doing one single thing: GET RID OF THE DUMB LOOKING ANGLE ON THE DIAL DECK. That’s all they’d have to do. Why do we immediately think that the Leica M’s and even the Fuji X100’s just look better? That damn angle on the top of the X-Pros.
With highly functionally designed tools we want the lines to be clean. If it isn’t there for a functional reason get rid of it! If we look at the X100V and XE-4, there is no doubt someone at Fuji gets this. I understand at Fuji each model has its own Director or VP. Maybe it’s time for somebody to retire before the Pro4 gets into prototyping.
USABILITY: If I’m at a party and even my best friend asks if he can take a picture with my camera and lens that cost me $13,000, what do you think my response will be? Could be yes or no, and you can rule out, yes.
In fact, I would not take a Leica to a party where alcohol might be consumed by anyone in the room. If you own a Leica and often find yourself in that situation, get a used X-T30 and party with confidence.
Interesting comparison, definitely both are inspiring cameras to go out shooting with and that's where the similarities stop in my opinion.
Your hair is always perfect, that's the real winner IMO. loved this comparison, great video bro. I personally like the fuji myself but that's just me. Keep these videos coming man!
Haha, thanks ✌🏾
Pretty most all serious photographers will end up with Leica eventually. 😅😅😅
9:50 lol why fu apple only? you know, there are more windows and androit devices
Вообщем игрушка для богатых)) Которые пытаются найти оправдание дорогой цены в каждом кадре. И видят это нечно)) чтобы оправдать завышенную стоимость. хехе
The only advantage I see to the Leica is its real optical focusing system. The 60mp full frame sensor won’t produce such an obvious iq difference in prints at my preferred sizes of up to 16x20 to make it meaningful for me. The X Pro 3 with the Fuji 33/1.4 at less than $3,000 with taxes makes more sense than the M11 with the Leica 50mm for $20,000 with taxes. The latter is more a piece of jewelry than anything else. My wife’s Rolex cost 3X as much as my Omega Speedmaster Professional, but the latter was chosen to go to the moon. Unless I earned my living as a photographer and could deduct its cost as a business expense, the Leica would not be a logical choice, except if I were as wealthy as the guy whose Bugatti Veyron I saw parked on the street in midtown Manhattan.
Haha, I appreciate you sharing. Thanks for watching.
Still watching but I gotta point out that you can adapt m mount lenses to fuji right? That would make fuji the winner of that point.
21:03 I don’t think that’s crazy that’s the case in so many things.
For fast moving street photography I'd suggest the Fuji X-T4 (or 100V) as that processor is better than the Pro 3 and closer to the Leica. And it's got a tiltable screen which is one big negative for all Leicas - and the reason I sold my SL. It's a great camera but for street photography the Fuji system is just better imo
Those Fuji cameras share the same processor and sensor. And again, better for some people. Depends on how and what you capture.
@@GajanBalan My bad...
Canon for the win, but the Fuji X-H2S eclipses anything ever made by Leica and that is straight facts.
😂
Triumph of form over content. Are you a Leica Ambassador?
Even though the Leica is a perfectly good workhorse it is, at the end of the day, an optional luxury item for enthusiasts that want one and can justify and afford the cost.
As a published photographer for 39 years and someone who has shot with many brands including Nikon, Canon, Minolta, Pentax, Bronica, Contax, Sigma, Zeiss, Hasselblad, Fuji, and Leica. I would say without a doubt that I disagree with atleast half of what you said.
First when I hear the word Fanboy mentioned, Ive heard that many more times targeted toward Leica users then Fuji. Also..Fuji have a great photography community of professionals that use their gear. I wouldn’t say as you put it, they are more geared toward only average consumers, not at all.
The difference is that Fuji have a wider range of affordable cameras that can appeal all the way from the average consumer up to Professionals. They have shown companies like Leica and Hasselblad that they can produce excellent Medium Format and rangefinder cameras that don’t have to sacrifice quality for price or be so god awful expensive that only rich people and high paid commercial photographers are the only ones that can afford them!
So in my opinion I think Fuji is much better for the photography community over Leica..
Thanks for sharing your opinion. It don’t know if you changed my mind but I think I should revisit this subject in 2024. But more importantly… did you make it to the end of the video?
None of this matters lol. Ultimately you pick the tool for the job (or the joy) and forget about the noise. The video itself is commentary on how arbitrary these types of conversations are. As a published photographer with all that experience, I’m sure you would agree 🤷🏾♂️
Simple answer to your question is….YES….
Please do the same for GFX100s and Leica. Make more sense
All signs point toward xpro4!
A beautiful round-up, and I totally agree about your exponential degree observations of price versus certain qualities. It applies in almost aspects of life and the individual's passion and hobbies - Cars, Boats, Cameras, Fancy Chef Ovens - at some point that last 10%, does it matter to the individual? Maybe. Want it? But rest assured - You'll be $paying$ for it..
Well said! Thanks for watching ✌🏾
Love this review! You hit on the key topic...what tool gets you to where you want to go! Price with Leica's is a factor, but that aside Leica makes wonderful cameras. I've been looking to go back to an M body from my Q. This video makes me want an M even more. I rented an M10P recently and it's just better for me in so many ways. I used to own a Pro-3 and a 100V as well....this may sound weird but most cameras have too many features for me. I love the minimalist shooting experience Leica provides.
Well said. Thanks for sharing!
Anyone with two hits of knowledge about optics, and the mechanics of a hand made camera would know that above a certain level of quality the improvemets are incremetal while the price shoots up exponentially. I am not getting nto the stupid argument of whether a Leica any Leica is worth the asking price, but we all have a brain that hopefully functions. And that shpuld tell us if a Leica is the right camera for us or not. All these debates are just superfluous, unless you just want to do a bit of Leica bashing just to views. Leica, any Leica M camera, film or digital is not the right camera for o er 99% of the photographets. That is my opinion, but Leicas are not maerketed at that 99% but the 1%. Photography is a craft, as well as scince, skill and art. That is whete the weakness of the majority of modern photographers lies. Sorry to be honest.
lol
Thought there was a grip for the M11.
Good point. Photographers arguing about cameras is as good as poets arguing about pens. Tools are tools, no tool will prevent great art work. Best art was created before the industrial revolution with traditional crafts, this should say something.
Well said. Thanks for watching.
Great video---with one exception: saying that the Leica lens ecosystem is close, much less equal to or better than Fuji, is laughable. If you are strictly considering native lenses, it would be different (as well as unfair/biased), but one of the great features of the X mount is that you not only have the good (albeit limited selection) native lenses, but can get lens adapters for many other brands, _including_ Leica M. And some Leica lenses (like Summilux) will actually perform _better_ on the Fuji than on a Leica, due to the crop factor. And you can even get adapters that support auto focus for the Fuji to use Nikon and Canon EF lenses. (That is in addition to the literally hundreds or possibly thousands of other lenses that you can choose from with manual focus.) So the lens category is really no contest.
I am strictly considering native lenses so, yea it’s not close. Thanks for watching 🙏🏾
Great video Gajan! Applying your scorecard, in addition the creative vision scale, has me contemplating the gear I would use myself plus what would be best for my wife. I bought her a rugged, waterproof camera that goes unused. The camera is easy enough to use but she is technophobic, so she doesn't know how transfer the images to her phone, nor does she have any desire to learn how to do that. But she likes taking pictures and has a good eye for composition. so to maximize her creative vision I need to find system that has extremely simple connectivity or get her the best cell phone camera I can find.
I agree on all point except lens eco system since fuji can use m mount lenses with adaptors and have a bigger acsess to adapted lenses. The fuji also use m lenses really good since those adaptors are small and almost makes the lens looks native..
I hear you, I was solely looking at native options.
Currently without a camera just sold my R5 because I can’t deal with large camera systems with big lenses anymore. So these both seem intriguing
Expensive not necessarily better, in this case fujifilm sells better than leica. Imagine just imagine fujifilm make their cameras to the highest quality like leica. Do you think leica is better than fujifilm?. Yes it’s possible, but fujifilm want’s their cameras accessible to mere mortal. Unlike leica with old technology and note, very old autofocusing system. Yes image quality is better with leica but when autofocus miss a lot then what’s the use of image quality. Hey Gajan you can’t afford leica , so just dream brother it’s free.
Lol
I would add one more category: availability/portability. This would not only apply to bulk but also to risk. The M11 and the X-Pro3 seem to be about the same size. But there are places I would take the Fuji rather than the Leica because of the risk factor.
I love Fuji but yes... it is :D I had both.
I think it doesn't do justice to the Leica to show its image quality with a dragged shutter image. Not a good choice.
To each their own ✌🏾
I love the Xpro3 and the Leica is really nice, but is there any tabngible way of comparing cost increase to image quality and value? No. It's just an expensive hobby for most people looking at camparison videos. Since we're on the topic, the X1D is "better", whatever that word means. If it makes you happy, mayeb it's worth 1000000x the price, up to you
I think we agree then? That’s the point underscored at the end of the video.
Bruh, you rock that Tony Northrup hair...lol Seriously though, nice video. I use Fuji for digital, and also use Leica lenses on sometimes. I shoot an old Leica M2 for film.
You’ve insulted me and my barber, how dare you 😂
Thanks for watching ✌🏾
Good vid. I wonder if this is it worth it discussion happens in other spaces? Like are there people commenting on vids about Lambos saying a BMW 3 series is just as good and nothing justifies the price? I mean if you want something, have the money, and it's worth it to you then I say go for it. I find most of this whole convo silly honestly.
That’s kinda the point when you watch til the end of the video 🤷🏽♂️
Man, I'm not in the market for either and probably won't be for a while (if ever) and I find myself sitting here watching till the end. Gajan, you make great videos man, appreciate you brother!
Haha, I truly appreciate that Mike. Thanks for watching ✌🏾
@@GajanBalan ✌
Back in the days of film I was heavy into R's and M's. Not so much for the body's (quite frankly I had more mechanical problems with the R's than I ever had with Canon and Nikon). But, the glass... Man, that glass was something else. Jump forward to digital... I can't do it. With PS and other post processing it's totally subjective. Maybe if I had WAY deeper pockets than I do I could justify it, but, with retirement looming it simply isn't worth the small gains (again subjective) "to me".
Fair and well said. Thanks for watching ✌🏾
You missed out a category that should definitely have been there …. Price.
You’re right. I figure if we’re entertaining this conversation then we’ve already overlooked price. But in the long run, none of this matters. You invest in the tool that makes the journey best for you.
The Fujifilm looks better compare to the Leica
nah
"The M11 is better, but not significantly better." When we take into consideration both camera's sensors - 60mp at 24x36mm size for the M11 and 26mp at 23.5 x 15.6mm for the X-Pro3 - the choice becomes clear, particularly for those who want to make exhibit quality prints.
No… for prints you should really go for a GFX… really! Nothing, save for Hasselblad and PhaseOne (sell a car or house to finance either system), compares to the print quality of images from the GFX
Leica isn't even 1% better, if better at all. A Bentley costs more than a 911 but track times tell the real story.
lol track times
I would say your assessment of lens ecosystem was misjudged. Yes, there’s a lineage of lenses going back many years… but because you have that many to choose from, doesn’t mean they’re always usable. They might need calibrating, or the cameras rangefinder calibrating to match a specific lens. Such specific focusing mechanisms come with such problems. A mirrorless system like the Fuji has by and far more lens options. Setting aside the native X mount, you can adapt literally any lens from nearly every manufacturer going back for decades on such a system… let alone all the third party new options now available. I know you can do this on Leica also, flange distance permitting, not so much so on a system like Fuji or a Sony etc. Interesting comparison though.
Lens ecosystem to me is natively, which mount has more options and the variety across those options. In that regard, the Leica wins out. Easily. But I should say, it doesn’t really matter. What really matters is which has the options you need for your work 🤷🏽♂️
@@GajanBalan fair point…. if you can afford to buy into the Leica ecosystem ;) I enjoyed the video though.
Lens Ecosystem goes to Fuji too as you need a Hollywood dentists money to own a few Leica lenses.
Missing the point but appreciate you sharing your thoughts ✌🏾
Hey, I like your hat and not your camera review.
😂
One has a full frame sensor the other has apsc that’s all you need to know.
Doesn’t matter
Did Fuji ever address your concerns with your xpro3?
What's funny is that I cut that piece out of this video. I had a 5 minute segment updating the situation but cut it out to streamline this video. I'm going to update the comment of that video with what happened but in short, they went above and beyond and took care of the issue as far as I can tell.
Thanks for that reply. I was going to get an XPro3 but was scared off by your experience and then finding many more folks with similar problems. Eager to hear the resolution of this disappointing scenario.
one can put lipstick on a pig, it does not turn it i to cinderella. Leica and Fuji are worlds apart.
This is vague enough to be read it as a slight to either brand. Nice work.
Using your scale, my iphone comes out at 95!
Exactly
I'd been a Fuji user ( and still am) but bought the Leica T after watching a Mattias Burling video at a bargain price (for less than X100F money) and used it. I began to understand the Leica ethos - clean, elegant and reliable. Sooner or later I'll pick up a q2--- I'll still continue to use and love my x t-3, and x-e3 but sometimes I want what one gives, sometimes the other. Btw Kudos on your bookcase- Ed Catmull-- Creativity Inc, Gordon Parks-the new tide and Magnum Contact Sheets-- all essential. You should do a video on your books sometime.
Thanks for watching and yes, I hope to diverge from the review content soon. To be frank, the goal is to leverage these gear videos to get to 50K, while doing in with our style and detail, then begin doing more experimental videos that are personal to me. I appreciate you noticing.
Great video. If I was going to watch one of these Leica vs Fuji, it’s gonna be yours. One could say “you’re a more trusted source” 😁
The X-Pro 3 is objectively a better camera and the M11 is subjectively better depending on your needs and wants. Leicas are extremely overpriced for what they offer as utilitarian photographic tools, and maybe not so as creative and enjoyable tools. Leica’s kept the same feel and method of the operation of their cameras, while everyone else turned their cameras into computers with lenses. The result is that the Leica method is now desired and sought after, and it’s acquired prestige has allowed it to be this overpriced luxury niche entity. Fuji brouhgt the analog and less computer operation feel to the masses, at a more reasonable and affordable price. That’s why the comparisons will never end. The M11 or any Leica camera are not better than Fuji cameras (flagship), except if we’re talking using a rangefinder and manual focus and or zone focus.
If you want to do documentary work, they’re both small, portable and nimble. It just depends how you prefer to work. Image quality: I think you as a working pro-photographer can tell/ are more qualified to say, as you’ll probably view the images on bigger and better displays than iPad youtube app, phone or computer screen. Maybe you’ll see large prints? At that point though, in a studio setting etc, isn’t that when you’d just go medium format to maximize that iq? GFX100S, etc?
I appreciate the kind words and thank you for sharing. I mean, it’s a great time to be a creative with this much choice on the market. Would be interesting to compare the IQ of M11 and GFX in a future video. Maybe not a dedicated one, but at least to discuss it in some capacity.
The fujifilm app is the worst app in history of apps
I’ve seen worse but yea, it needs an upgrade.
The answer is easy. No it's not. No matter what you say about opinion or creative gap or what inspires you, factually speaking the M is not 5 times better than the fuji xpro 3. Not by any metric other than price. Image quality, the most subjective item or biggest difference between the 2 isn't a 5x difference. This is the case with most consumer items. The "top of the line" is always suffering from extreme diminishing returns and is not X times better than the alternative brand. I cycle, and the top of the line road bike can cost a person anywhere from 12,000 to 15,000, but those bikes are not 5 times better than mid range 3,000 bikes. For racers and professionals, people who NEED those seconds of extra speed, the price is justified. It's also justified for people who simply have the money and want that extra speed, either for their own improvement or for the pride of owning such an item. Anyone can justify the leica's 5x price, or even 10x price over other cameras, either by quoting historical value, fun, comfort, or that it's the only real rangefinder. Whether or not it's 5 or 10x better though is not an argument. It is not.
To say the answer is easy and then proceed to type 500 words is wild 😅
The answer is even easier: none of this matters. Which is exactly what I said at the end of the video.
@@GajanBalan Yeah I was just trying to cover my bases and explain myself instead of just typing a few words that could and would be misconstrued. I think it matters to people who desire a certain amount of value from 2 products that are for the same purpose.
How many photography influencers will talk about a logarithmic scale to measure tools? 👍👍👍
For the question of whether the 10pt gap is worth the 5x price, it is helpful to consider the scores relative to the typical camera and typical photographer. It is also important to consider the overall value a person seeks to get as a photographer. If the typical score is 65, then the X-Pro3 and M11 are 20 and 30 pts higher, making the 10pt gap a 50% increase.
The value can be measured by either paid work, 'implied' paid work as images/prints sold to ourselves, or intangible value like creative pleasure. If that is $20k over the life of the X-Pro3, then the 50% increase for the M11 seems worth the cost. Finally, while the "creative execution" scale is logarithmic, the "product revenue" scale may be exponential. An image from the lower scoring camera might be worth $50 while the other one might be $500. While this seems a bit contrived, since everyone has a camera in their pocket, there is a sense of only wanting to pay for 'exceptional' images, made with high creative execution.
I’m guessing you didn’t make it to the end of the video where I say none of this matters 😅
@@GajanBalan Haha, I saw that too. I also meant to edit my comment with, "This is mostly me writing this for me to read." I have used a similar thought process when considering more expensive lenses. And I need to sell more prints...
Very cool video. I like how you laid things out and gave your opinions based on your experiences. I do agree with pretty much all your points, the pros and cons of each brand.
While I can see and understand the value a Leica may provide for others, for me and my work, it is not worth the money, and provides zero benefit over what my X-Pro3 offers.
Keep up the good work!
Thanks for watching 🙏🏾
I think if you did this review with a Fujifilm xt5 that functionally it's probably a better camera than the Leica understand where you were coming from it's like driving a BMW and say driving a really nice car the BMW is going to feel nicer and give you that buzz but it's still gets you from A to B is the 8B just as important yes it is is that comparison because that's where I see this video and that's not a criticism in reality though most people can't afford a lieca
The end of video summarizes it pretty well. None of this matters.
@@GajanBalan yeah totally agree if you lined up a lot of cameras side-by-side and then took photos with all the different cameras it would be very difficult to pick which camera to which photo of Off and said this. If you hand a half decent camera to professional photographer I'm in that semi professional mode, well professional, but I don't have a big ego about it. You can pretty much pass me any camera and I'm gonna be out take a good photo with it so I know what I'm doing thank you for the clarification though.
I'm curious, since you own Fujifilm's GFX line of cameras. It will be quite interesting when you compare it with the leica m11
If I had to run the metrics, the GFX would win out but it'll just come back to the end point of the video which is, none of it matters lol.
@@GajanBalan I'm just curious =))), GFX is 5X better than leica M11 =)), I don't care who wins. I just watched your video and I already know that leica wins for sure when compared to xpro3, but the meaning of the video is how far is the difference between the winners and the losers, it makes me curious. You did a great episode.
Short answer : no.
Not that much.
Great lineup. I agree on service and support. Leica sadly lacks a pro-support program (Fuji has FPS), and some repairs require you to send the camera to Germany and some will take months to repair. That definitely needs to be improved. Otherwise Leica is a great camera.
You’re right! I actually completely forgot to mention FPS as well, big differentiator for pros.
Really great video. My main concern about the Leica M series is the undertone assumption that the camera WILL need to be sent back for regular maintenance. At the price, regular servicing should be designed out, so is the legendary Leica reliability only propped up by the willingness of users to accept this further hit to the wallet? This is something generally not heard about the Fuji unless there is a fault.
I think what adds to this is that you could have an incredibly old Leica (except for an M8 and that unique sensor) and still have it serviced whereas that isn't commonplace with Fujifilm.
@@GajanBalan fair comment, but if either of these two cameras was to be the only camera, with which you had to complete all your photography, no second bodies, no other systems? How might you revisit the point of value for money?
Lenses? Wrong, so wrong, all of Leica's lenses can fit onto the X Pro with the adaptor...
Just looking at native options here but also… none of this matters, like I said at the end of the video ✌🏾
Fair enough, gutted for you that you've had this shutter release issue, I haven't with mine - I always use 5fps never single, not sure if that's relevant @@GajanBalan
When you get into great products like Fuji and Leica, additional spending gets you smaller improvements. Anyone who buys luxury goods knows this. A camera that costs five times as much isn’t going to be five times better. That’s just not how it works. The last increments of quality cost a fortune.
Right. Exactly what’s communicated at the end of the video.
Personally like fujis colours but if you want to talk about technical aspects get a full frame stop wasting time with apsc
nah
@@GajanBalan technically a full frame produces a better image than an APSC
No... next.
Thanks for the comparison video.
I shoot a Leica M10 digital rangefinder with the following lenses:
Leica 21mm f/1.4 Summilux-M
Zeiss 35mm f/1.4 Distagon ZM
Leica 90mm f/2 Summicron
I also shoot a Fuji X-Pro2 digital mirrorless with the following Fujinon lenses:
56mm f/1.2
23mm f/1.4
16mm f/1.4
16-55mm f/2.8
50-140mm f/2.8
If I could select two features from my M10 and add them to my X-Pro2, it would be the rangefinder manual focusing and the ability to produce high quality 24x36mm images with the M-mount lenses I already own.
If I could select two features from my X-Pro2 and add them to my M10, it would be the reasonable price and twin memory card slots.
Fuji all week long. Leica is way over rated and way over priced. There is nothing to justify the price Leica sets for their cameras.
Build quality, materials and the 'experience' are what makes Leica worth more. A lot more? Maybe not. But there are good reasons for it to be more expensive. And this comes from a Fuji shooter for over a decade, and a user of Leica. I do miss autofocus sometimes though!
Have you used leica cameras especially the m series extensively? I was a skeptic until i tried shooting with them, nothing really comparable with the shooting experience and the files they produce so their price is somewhat justifiable. Also don’t forget their lenses, nothing renders like those summiluxes really.
@@marcelinomichael9564 i thought the same as well until I purchased an M. I love using the rangefinder and manual lenses. It's so much fun.
Community? That's a bit unfair. Fujifilm is a Japanese company. Japanese are by nature unwilling to take strong stands on almost anything, which, strangely, is in itself a strong stand. The stand is the belief that it's wrong to alienate others or make them feel uncomfortable. Japanese stick to this philosophy to a fault. If you talked to people at Fuji who are Japanese and they wanted to take a stronger stand in some way I'd be interested to know what that is specifically. If these individuals are Japanese they are probably radical Japanese.
Nope…
To establish my comment:
a) Credentials: Into photography since Xmas 1958. Darkroom since 1968, Color printing 1972. Expert in 35mm, 120, 4x5. Darkroomer from 1968 to 2016. On digital since 2009 but hybrid since 2004. Still shooting film *and of course digital* but abandoned chemical printing (formerly known as enlarging) when I found that Epson & Ilford had beaten Kodak (and Ilford) to fine prints.
b) Leica: My first experience was with my father's IIIf in 1967 when I ended picking his Retina IIIc for an European vacation. Next time was after my father's demise when I was bestowed his IIIf, Retina IIIc (small c) and his favorite, a Canonet QL/9. Next, M6+Summicron 35, M2, MP, M10.
c) Actual: Septuagenary; shoots regularly, film, digital... process C41 and B&W -- pretty experienced with both, kept a darkroom from my colset while college student to grandfather today. Shoot *daily* even if it's garbage.
d) Opinion: Leica is a passion, a gut feeling, a flavor, a style, a snob position. I love them, they have a simple, unobstrussive, intuitive design. Probably the only thing you need to learn is loading the film (digitals excepted). However, once you accept that no one knows what brush brand or style DaVinci used, Fuji offers a working or amateur photographer much better *tools,* you might say for studio, street, or simply vacationing; then at a fraction the price and 95% the quality.
Take it from a LeicaLover; been to solms BTW, that's *NOT* a large factory.
Spoiler, Leica fan boy thinks Leicas are worth five time the price!
Always fun to see who got triggered before making it to the end of the video. Thanks for trying 😘
@@GajanBalan Why would I get triggered over a Leica owner trying to justify their camera cost?
I gave my Q2 to my training assistant to take some shots of me and some pupils. I set it on touch and focus release! Simples! She just touched my face the LCDscreen. It focused and shot in a second. Great feature.
Not sure what you mean by community. No examples offered to make it clear. My first thought was that Fuji pioneered firmware updates that were not just bug fixes, but added functionality. Leica's sometimes my way or the highway attitude is the opposite of commmunity in my opinion.. Your final argument for the specific need of the photographer is the most persuasive.
Two different Cameras.. Full frame vs APSC.. One is almost a work of ART. The other is trying to always live in the shadow of the other. TWO different cameras, conjure two different mindsets...
This is reminiscent of the recent video by Hugh from 3 Blind Men and an Elephant, who also shoots Leica and Fuji, where in talking about Fuji’s new 33mm, he thinks Fuji is at an inflection point where they have to up the resolution of their XT line to keep up with all the small mirrorless full frame cameras, which are no longer large clunky DSLRs. Basically he thinks their new lenses are so good they can out-resolve the sensor, even go head-to-head with some Lecia glass,and frankly that might be intentional on their part. The XH2 will be announced soon, after all, and may sport Sony’s new 43Mp aps-c sensor (though FujiRumours reckon it will be a 40-megapixel sensor).
When you said community I thought you were referring to exclusively the community of people that use and talk about the cameras rather than the marketing culture
No disrespect intended, but I love a 23-minute comparison Leica-Fuji video that includes the observation that "many of these comparisons are ultimately bullshit." FWIW, I am doing the Fuji-Leica comparison (X100V vs. Q) right now.
Customer support from Leica is terrible. You pay 5 times the price of most other cameras. And you wait 5 times as long, when send in for repair or adjustments. Right now a small repair takes 2-3 months in Wetzlar. This is not acceptable....