Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2012/11/25

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: [Leica] x-100 and Marks comments
From: mark at rabinergroup.com (Mark Rabiner)
Date: Sun, 25 Nov 2012 18:21:41 -0500

I would call it for sure Leica-like. And very worthy of discussion on this
list. As in I'd NOT call it "OT".

Which means On Target, or
Overtime,  or
Out of Town

Old-Timer
Oregon Trail
Oliver Twist and
Occupied Territories.


Mark William Rabiner
Photography
http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/lugalrabs/


> From: Scott Gregory <scottgregory at mac.com>
> Reply-To: Leica Users Group <lug at leica-users.org>
> Date: Sun, 25 Nov 2012 16:51:54 -0500
> To: Leica Users Group <lug at leica-users.org>
> Subject: Re: [Leica] x-100 and Marks comments
> 
> Mark I have a friend in my city of London who uses an X100 for street
> photography as well as a lot of family shots as he has a 4 month old Son. 
> The
> quality of the photos he gets is amazing and I've seen his prints framed as
> well which are amazing, especially in black and white. It's certainly a 
> nice
> sized camera to carry around and does turn heads for sure.
> 
> On 2012-11-25, at 1:35 PM, Mark Rabiner <mark at rabinergroup.com> wrote:
> 
>> Its a nice camera the X100 ... pardon me please for hitting too hard the
>> point and it being a "quality" camera or not. Semantics.
>> Its a great camera for the person who owns it and is getting great shots
>> with it.  
>> urns my head when I pass one on the street. Excellently styled. A super
>> great camera for the money is my opinion. And a bit of a milestone.
>> 
>> Just bad timing as it was followed so closely by the full frame RX1 so the
>> honeymoon would have been shortened a bit on its stance on the total 
>> playing
>> field.
>> That's my opinion. And I think it will reflect many others. Or I'll find 
>> out
>> sooner or not. I just call it as I see it. Sometimes I'm wrong. But I'm
>> happy about how often I'm right my position is having done serious  and
>> professional photography for many decades my first darkroom in the mid 
>> '60s.
>> 
>> Mark William Rabiner
>> Photography
>> http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/lugalrabs/
>> 
>> 
>>> From: jon streeter <jon.streeter at cox.net>
>>> Reply-To: Leica Users Group <lug at leica-users.org>
>>> Date: Sun, 25 Nov 2012 08:34:14 -0800
>>> To: Leica Users Group <lug at leica-users.org>
>>> Subject: Re: [Leica] Olympus XA (OT)
>>> 
>>> Maybe I've bonded with my X100 because I don't have an M9.  My bank 
>>> account
>>> and I can see where this is going.
>>> 
>>> Sent from my Verizon Wireless Phone
>>> 
>>> ----- Reply message -----
>>> From: "John McMaster" <john at mcmaster.co.nz>
>>> To: "Leica Users Group" <lug at leica-users.org>
>>> Subject: [Leica] Olympus XA (OT)
>>> Date: Sat, Nov 24, 2012 11:35 pm
>>> 
>>> 
>>> I have never really bonded with my X100, at high ASA it beats my M9 but 
>>> in
>>> good light there is no comparison as far as I am concerned - this is from
>>> experience rather than reading web sites, unlike some ;-)
>>> 
>>> john
>>> 
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> 
>>> So, how many images have you made with the X100 since you know so much 
>>> about
>>> it?
>>> 
>>> Looking in my LR catalog, I see 1497 X100 images. Many of them are in 
>>> poor
>>> light, and I would put them against an M9 any time.
>>> 
>>> I am going to Paris for a couple of days on Tuesday, and because I need 
>>> to
>>> travel ultra-light, I am taking just the X100. I am sacrificing some
>>> versatility wrt. focal length by doing so, but I am NOT sacrificing any
>>> image
>>> quality.
>>> 
>>> Cheers,
>>> Nathan
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On Nov 25, 2012, at 6:07 AM, Mark Rabiner wrote:
>>> 
>>>> The 800 dollar camera is in sync with the fact that its sensor is half
>>>> the size of the RX1.
>>>> This is the Leica list and we're talking about a high quality camera.
>>>> Its not a smaller then necessary format camera selling for the price
>>>> of a Leica lens shade.
>>>> The Rollei 35 and Olympus XA really could give your SLR quality.
>>>> If they were half frame cameras they could not.
>>>> The Fuji is a half frame in effect digital camera.
>>>> "quality" is not why your buying the camera unless your comparing it
>>>> against junk point and shoots.
>>>> And my apologies to those who bought the camera thinking you were
>>>> buying a piece of top pro gear. But it would not take a genius to
>>>> figure out a full frame compact was in the wings. And yes they cost real
>>>> money.
>>>> 
>>>> Mark William Rabiner
>>>> Photography
>>>> http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/lugalrabs/
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Leica Users Group.
>>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Leica Users Group.
>>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Leica Users Group.
>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information




In reply to: Message from scottgregory at mac.com (Scott Gregory) ([Leica] x-100 and Marks comments)