betting typ 113

berdych vs kyrgios betting expert

Best betting tips Whatever asset you are accepting your best betting tips from must have taught specialists who can inquire about and find these deviations. Email:- balanceyourbet gmail. Whatever asset you are accepting your best betting tips from must have taught specialists who can inquire about and find these deviations. These are the sort of deviations that can assist you with being effective in a diversion that not very many individuals succeed at in the long haul. Email balanceyourbet gmail.

Betting typ 113 is online sports betting illegal in minnesota

Betting typ 113

It is the viewfinder which was originally listed as an accessory for the X1. How wrong I was. I do prefer its look and lightness when placed on the little X1. I had no idea what I had been missing. So, dear readers, if you have persevered this far, here are some questions for you to ponder. Will the X1 ever be considered a digital classic? What about other members of the Leica X family?

Which looks better on the camera? Which one would you choose? All opinions are right, there is no wrong answer. The future looks much brighter for me. I have an X2 which also produces stunning images — when I get round to using it. Hello John. We are quite aligned. Travelled with them in Asia and the Australian outback.

But tended to find the Oly evf to be out of proportion when travelling. I have the D-lux7 my latest which to all intents and purposes is the same as your I use it a lot in the square format — a whole new way of seeing. Quite different from seeing in or and deciding to crop in pp. Wayne, the little black sack is intended for mild protection when the camera is carried in a larger bag.

There is also a grey leather erc for the X1. The small leather case for the Leica optical viewfinder can be attached to a neck or bag strap. I find the detachable finder less useful indoors and is secured in one of these Leica containers. Yes, I have long argued that the Leica X1 is a classic camera. I find it very disappointing that it was not developed further. I attribute that to the lack of continuity within Leica top management and its overworked design teams.

There seems to be precious little feed back from user experience into future derivatives of compact Leica cameras.. Thanks for your interest DavidA. Given that I have only recently picked up the Leica viewfinder I found it strange when it arrived in the cloth bag contained within the original box. But it was clear that the accompanying grey leather case was never a part of that original pack. But that grey case sure is cute, almost as cute as the viewfinder itself.

Thanks for sharing. Hello Jean. I used than Olympus VF2 on the X2. It did the job really well, but I must admit that I always thought it a bit oversized for purpose. I plead guilty. I still have them all but when I go out socially if and when again… the X2 has and is my pick up as I leave the house. X1 and X2 are classics! I use both the Leica 36 and the EVF — which tilts — but the non digital one is a pleasure to look through. Thank you for further insight Tony.

I had the X2 and the X1 simultaneously at one stage. It really was a toss of the coin regarding which one I kept. I chose the X1. Like I said, there is no wrong answer. Continue to enjoy the X2, it does have certain advantages over the earlier X1.

As you say, I have both the X1 and X2. The X2 with the EVF does offer some advantages although it strays from the Barnack formula because of that step under the hot-shoe. The X2 is thus the ugly duckling of the duo, although probably a more satisfying tool. But for simplicity, especially without the optical viewfinder, the original X1 is the one that feels more like classic material.

Hello Rick. Interesting alternative nevertheless, and worth a look. It is indeed 28mm and therefore not ideal but not impossible for use on the X1. I must try it. Ricoh also offer the GV-1 for the GR. It is bigger, indeed similar in size to the Leica models. It has two frames, the standard GR 28mm and 21mm for use with the wide-angle accessory lens.

Interesting article, I totally agree that the X1 is, or certainly should be, a future classic, as I love shooting with mine and as you say, the image quality is superb in the right circumstances. I have been using the Olympus detachable viewfinder which works pretty well, but I would be fascinated to see the difference between that and the Leica version, as they look very similar in shape and design.

Hi Simon. Yes, check out a used Leica Bright Line at a dealer shop if you can. It might need to have pre-owned stock, but the result could be an eye opener. All the best with your pursuits. You dont need me to answer the question truly you already know what I would say, of course the X1 will make classic status.

For me it was the camera that brought about my truly loved, and never to let go X typ , which produces stunning images. I have considered finding an eye piece to see if that improves my love of the camera — or improves its versatility and widens it use. The image quality out of my X, is always a thing to behold, and I only prefer using my Df when light is challenging, or I am indoors, in those circumstances the Df is king.

I am now wondering if I can find a decent eye piece option for my x It would at least give me something to tinker with when being outdoors with a camera returns. Gday Dave. I think there will always be folks who respect the X series cameras. Never say never. Would you say the X-Typ is worth it used? Or maybe I should look for an X1 as a walkaround camera and sell the Ricoh I find 28mm equivalent a little too wide for my taste.

In this respect, older Leicas are different from equivalent cameras from other manufacturers. If you can also buy the tilting viewfinder I think you would have a sensible buy. Thanks for the reply Mike. Yes the old Leicas seem to hold their value well. You can read similar about the X1 and X2 and, frankly, any Leica over the past ten years. If you like the results then nit-picking by reviewers is of little concern. I find all the X cameras, from the X1 to the X Vario, produce excellent images.

I love my little X typ, its a really useful camera. I remember reading all of the negativity when I researched buying mine. And was a little apprehensive about doing so, but one or two, who knew what they could do, convinced me it was a worthy purchase. I wrote an article about it on here, and my flickr page has many images new and old on there, as i still use the camera almost daily.

Image quality is amazing out of it, once you get the hang of it. I post process the raw files, which look a little soft on first glance, but are easily resolved. I also used it as my sole photographic outlet for nearly two years, and then added a Df to the kit bag. Hope this helps, feel free to ask more questions, and the price you are quoting on here looks healthy. Thanks for the reply Dave. I have read though that it can be frustrating and not very enjoyable to use.

Decisions decisions! I owned an RX1 for time the original version and it was ok, but somehow rather uninvolving. The fact that you can buy it so cheaply is perhaps something to consider. The Leica Q, which is a far better camera, is considerably more expensive. However, it would be a good idea to try an RX1 before you buy. It is no bigger than the Leica X but has the big attraction of the larger sensor.

The Sony has no soul, it doesnt give you decent feedback, and yes the images are decent and it has bell, whistles and what not on it. I am also a member of the X happy owner's club. My Fuji X and XE1 are ready for ebay. But my X1 stays. I saw a video on youTUBE of some guys reviewing the M and one of them was complaining because "it lacks autofocus"? Seemed like a very fair review by a well qualified reviewer. I don't see how more experience with the camera would really make a difference regarding most of his negative comments.

Besides, most reviewers don't get to live with a camera for extended periods of time. A day or a week is reasonable. I'm curious, how long did you keep "basically all" of the Fuji cameras before you determined they weren't good enough for you? Long enough both time and number of shots to know they would not do it for me.

I found little compelling about them. I found their reviews to be full of expectations that were not appropriate to the cameras, as if they figured with the price tag they were buying a top end DSLR. Well, I don't miss my 5DII at all. I'm very happy with Xt1, and found the majority of reviews consistent and accurate in terms of the camera's pros and cons.

These cameras are not competitive on featur, specs or price. Where they excel is in their design and handling, as well as the image quality it's all about the glass. Still love it. I bought a Panasonic with a Leica vetted lens. I for myself am certain I got the better deal. Might have gotten a lot of parts in it identical to the ones in this camera ;. They look so good but get let down by IQ. There are so many that do better. Panasonic do better so why the dickens don't they talk to their pals with the enormous electronics company and do what Leica do best - lenses and way too cool design.

Raw conversion - reportage must shoot jpeg must not be altered by editing so any such camera must produce good jpeg. So playing with a raw file is for fixing one that assumed rotund pearosity. Leica is Leica and the teutonic mindset is not likely to change to meet customer complaints or requirements. The quirks and the pricing help set the parameters on an ever decreasing customer set, although the latest balance sheets might suggest the strategy is working.

But in the long run it's just a tool and applied to the right problem, it is usually an elegant solution. I am not convinced that leica is the same leica company from few decades ago. For many of us Leica was the pinnacle of photography. Todays digital leica - I don't know. I don't really see any added value from fuji system for example. The Fuji XT looks and handles more like Leica then this camera.

The image qauilty will same. I have on idea what Leica engineers are thinking about when design these cameras. I have a feeling the got one group that designs the way it will look, the other the camera itself. The guys that say what about the looks have all the say and you get a great looking poor operating camera as this one is.

That may put them back on the map. For now look to Fuji for a mondern Leica camera. Perhaps because a range-finder is not used like a normal camera. It harks back to film and reportage when AF did not exist and the camera had to be pre-set to allow quick thinking for shooting. Actually i've seen plenty Pros using Leica, just that Canokon is cheaper and has good Pro support as well as in some cases more convenient operating lenses.

To each their own. In any case the Sony a7s has allowed me to compare several manufacturer's lenses on the same sensor and I gotta tell you that there are occasional Zeiss' that can match a -cron centrally However, by and large the -crons will make the Canokons and Zeiss' look soft central and downright broken at the edges. You may or may not like the M.

It is quirky, but that's part of then fun. It does take beautiful pictures however and part of that equation is the glass. A large part in fact. Add to the IQ, the size, weight and build quality make these lenses a bargain. Yeah, they decided to advertise for Leica by finding some people who said the cameras were only so-so. For no one. Its not advertising unless you believe another company arranged this post as a way to make Leica look bad.

Nor is it advertising for Leica unless you think a good strategy to promote your product is to find people who don't like it. Even with those "flaws" I bet this camera can take beautiful pictures. And it is one sexy piece of photography gear. I would trade it for my X1 in a beat. Except for higher ISOs and a slower lens, sometimes, the X1 is an excellent camera, why trade?

More pixels? I think based on pictures that it is a more hefty body, maybe less point and shoot feeling? The stop faster, which it delivers shallower DoF But I agree the X1 is excellent! You are mistaken, I've never spent much time defending the "Leica Corporation", whatever that is. In other words, you've completely confused my point in order to misdirect from the basic substance of it.

Saying much more about your motivation than mine. But lenses and bodies are two very different things. They sure have some nice lenses still often overpriced, in my opinion , but the bodies are WAY overpriced. But hey, i understand that you pay for the brand not only ofc, not saying the cameras are bad. But to me, that's very odd, at least when it comes to Leica prices.

You're the obnoxious bore who has to nitpick every single negative opinion expressed about a company that doesn't give a crap about you, RAW. That's not nitpicking. You keep trying to make an argument that isn't mine into something I said. This is less than strong logic on your part. They dismissed digital for too long. The newish 90mm and 75mm M lenses aren't as optically good as they should be, nor is the 23mm T lens.

For the price, Leica binoculars should be better than Zeiss and Meopta but they're not. And for that price buy Swarovski. All that said, a well executed Leica camera lens is optically hard to match. Zeiss, Samsung and Olympus and one Sigma being the only real challengers. I think Leica, for a small hand made house, gets a rough ride here but for sure if you compare on spec sheet its rarely that Leica ever wins.

Nowadays almost every serious camera has an image-quality that is more than sufficial for everything. This was very different when the Leica was invented years ago. In those days most newspaperphotographers used largeformatcameras because lenses and films where so bad! The small body and lenses and the rangefinder make the Leica attractive. I tried some Fuji X1 but the electronic viewfinder does not work for me, because of its delay. My canon 5dII has great lenses as well, but they are so bulky and heavy, that i rather shoot the Leica M, the rangefinder is slower than AF, but that makes me consider my shots instead of shooting without thinking.

Yes, the Leica has great lenses, but I use mine also with old lenses from Canon or Yashica M39 which are great lenses as well. At least some of them. Speaking of image qualtity: The part 2 of 2 the Leica X is a point and shoot camera. I made great A3 30x42cm prints from a canon 20D in shot with an old Zeiss Planar for Rolleiflex. I often like to shoot subjects when back-lit or in high contrast lighting situations and have come to expect Raw files with enough latitude to work with, even in difficult lighting.

I exposed some of my samples not well for a background and recovering faces wasn't hard. It's not something I'd do if I owned the camera, and had it set up the way I'd want. Of course the lens matters. But Leica isn't' the only top quality lens. Nikkor, Canon, Zeiss also make excellent lenses. I would suspect that if the identical photo was taken using the above array of lensesmost viewers would be hard pressed to identify the lens of manufacturer.

With that said, if people want to spend their money on any brand of body or lens--regardless of price--that's their business. But in choosing one top notch system versus another--it's mostly about the hardware. If readers want to justify their purchases by thinking their camera and lens take the worlds best pictureswell, so what. It's their money. Canon and Nikon lens do not equal the optical performance of half decent Leica lenses. Not even close. And yes some Sigmas are starting to show promise.

When I was 20, I would have killed for a Leica, but now that I'll be turning 65 in a week, I find, oddly, I have absolutely zero interest in owning a Leica. I don't need a beautiful, well built, reasonably competent, digital camera that is obsolete within 2 months of its release. I feel I can get by with an uglier, less well built, but still reasonably competent camera that is obsolete within 2 months of its release.

Besides, most of my friends who would likely be impressed with my owning a Leica are either dead or confused by my inability to give up the passions of my adolescence. A couple are just confused. My new E-M10 will likely last until I'm dead. And after that, it won't matter much, will it?

I've never touched a Leica, and perhaps if I hadd I'd feel differently. But it strikes me that if you buy a Leica you're paying a heck of a lot for that red dot. But, I don't get the attraction to really expensive watches either. Really expensive watches have not functioned better than cheap watches since the s, whereas good examples of Leica lenses, of which there are many, are optically better than most other lenses in the year and will be for at least another 10 years.

I think you're confused about the word "obsolete", unless you chase higher and higher ISOs. HowaboutRaw - Not confused, just making a broad generalization for the sake of humor. I'm sorry the humor escaped you. Okay, but the problem is "Leica is obsolete" is an oft repeated error. Albeit the rest of your post does read as humor.

HowaboutRaw - please educate me - which of the old Leica lenses matches for example the 35mm Sigma Art lens in resolving power? Even if I died, I might not have time to lie down. SkiHound: "if you buy a Leica you're paying a heck of a lot for that red dot. Are you sure your not already dead? There used to be only 2 parts of cameramaking which both required great craftsmenship: manufacturing of the housing and - separately - the optics. Today, the largest and third part of a camera are electronics - which change so fast, by the time you are finished developing them, they are already outdated.

Leica has since the digital age clearly focused on the perfection of the housing, which they do beautifully like no other. But the BEST cameras are built by others. The problem is, who wants to spend this much money on a camera which is already outdated when new, not to mention a few years down the road? Because someone should start to do something about the terrible planned obsolescense in the camera industry, and Leica would be a great company to start.

If you want interchangeable Leica hardware get an M or S2. I entirely agree and have said the same thing many times. I also think one day sensors will be available on a roll like film - a new clean sensor for every shot..! I am "old school", being Photography has changed enormously over the last fifteen years. Five Megapixels! It took remarkable photos despite the mongers who claimed that digital would never beat film quality The nub, is that with a slow camera and an even slower person handling it, one can still take great photos.

Today, speed appears to be of the essence. Granted we are not geniuses like he was, but so what? If you want to just take photos, use your mobile. If you want to record photos for posterity, buy a decent camera. If you want to savour the pleasure of taking photographs, buy a Leica. I envy all that can afford one but relish in their enjoyment. Absolutely agree. The digilux 2 was and is a great camera.

I had one and sold it to buy an M8. I also still have a digilux 3 but the earlier version was better to use. I have a low milage mint Digilux 2 I would like to donate to an aspiring photography student. Sensor replaced by Leica. An Audi shares much of its components with a VW, yet people proudly spend the extra money for, essentially, the same product..

How many people complaining about Leica are at the same time making the opposite judgment about the car they drive? It is not ironic that someone with an Audi A3 may complain about the price of a Leica? Surely, wouldn't they be smarter if they just bought a Golf? And these Audis aren't being parked in garages but on the streets. As for Leica lenses, there isn't some exact substitute. Right a good Zeiss or even recently Samsung lens is considered as optically good as a good Leica lens, but the look is different.

The difference is that Audis are genuinely better cars; meanwhile, whis particular Leica camera has nothing to show for its price. I think what has happened to Leica is similar to what has happened to Rolex. In both cases, their products were at one time at the technological peak of their respective industries..

Today, both are enormously expensive status symbols, but no longer at the forefront. In specific regard to the Leica M, you rarely, if at all see them being used by professionals--yet for the cost of one, you can easily buy a top of the line Nikon or Canon pro model. Only well heeled amateurs can afford an Mand I wonder how many of them would dare risk their expensive cameras to the outside weather elements as well as risk of theft? You kind of have a point about Leica bodies, but you really don't seem to care about lenses.

Leica lenses are still better than almost all other lenses, and it's something that's pretty easy to see. Few buy Leicas digital cameras for the bodies, though the S2 is a good bit cheaper than a PhaseOne. Actually, one does see pros using current Leica Ms. Not all pro photographers only shoot sports, which would not be a place to use a Leica M. MartyCL: "In specific regard to the Leica M, you rarely, if at all see them being used by professionals".

I use my Leica M9-P professionally. I rarely ever bring out my Nikons unless I'm shooting fast sports with a telephoto. And even then the Leica comes along with me. All shot with a Leica M9-P, a camera which many people say is obsolete. A pretty case and a red dot don't make you a better photographer, just a lot poorer. Leica as a brand was past its sell by date many years ago. Not a rebadged Panasonic here. Small, quiet, very good image quality through ISO , and a lens optically significantly better than the competition like the Fuji X, and equaling the lens in the more expensive, slower to focus, Sony RX1.

Smart people buy a Leica M and used mint condition Leica M lenses. The only system which does not loose value over time as the lenses appreciate in value. This is called common sense. Good luck. If this could merge with the best features of the Sony RX1 and Sigma DP2 in a sealed, tank-like body allowing for full control, then it would be really interesting. Not sure why Leica can't do that in their price ranges. Unobtanium, I know. As is the RX1.

The Sigma Quattro is easy to handle, but has huge files. And on Mac a later release of Iridient will likely open Sigma raws. Samsung is not well set for Leica M but can't afford those lenses anyways. Ricoh GR is interesting but wonder where it will go from here.

Sigma is really interesting sounding and may be the most affordable experiment, with exception of permission for yet another camera At this price you could buy a sony a and adapt a leica M lens, or a fancy zeiss ZM lens and be way better off for images and build quality. The build quality can be high but its useless to have good build quality when the image quality it delivers is as shitty as these images.

People who are going to buy a camera like this aren't going for best bang for their buck. They aren't living paycheck to paycheck. They aren't driving the most economical cars. They have money to spend. You really don't know what you're talking about. Yes, some people will buy for the name, and some will buy for the name and the lens, and others will buy for the lens sensor combination alone. My DNG samples, which I won't share, are more than adequate. And you can look at Ming Thein's blog for very good photos shot with this Leica.

HowaboutRAW - it's you who doesn't get it. The point I was getting is that there is a world of wealthy consumers out there with much, much higher levels of discretionary income than most people here at dpreview who are pouring over test charts and specs sheets trying to get the best bang for their limited bucks.

To these people, paying that price differential is not such a big deal, and it's worth it simply for the comfort. A lot of people here wouldn't be able to stomach that price differential, even if they could afford it. When I talk about Leica and Zeiss lenses, I've used, and owned, extraordinary examples of both. And when I comment on a new camera here, I've almost always shot at least a few test shots with an example. The lens in both cases would be a bit darker, but they both are exceptional lenses and from what we heard about the leica X much better than the lens on this camera.

Anyway, it really depends on who is buying Some observations about DPR. It's a valuable site to gain insight into camera specific capabilities and features, but there's always lots of text juxtaposing and comparing camera A vs. Never understood that. Unfortunately, the images posted that are taken with the tested cameras never seem to emphasize what the camera and photographer are capable of producing as far as aesthetically pleasing, well composed killer photographs with the camera.

Just repetitive images of things many if not most photographers would ever consider in their decision to spend any serious money. I guess the so-called test or post images attempt to remove the photographer from the analysis and just focus on the technical. In my mind, I would like to see results that challenge the photographer and camera to produce those great photos and not just technical photos examining esoteric features of the camera and the image.

After all, the camera is just a tool. I wouldn't take real seriously what these "photographers" have to say about this Leica. It's pretty easy to use PhotoShop CS5 to recover the shadowed bumper of the Saab jpeg--and blow the sky. A different feature Paint.

Net and GIMP will pretty much do the same thing. It's pretty easy to use PhotoShop CS5 or 6 to recover the shadowed bumper of the Saab jpeg--and not blow the sky. Wow, this write-up has certainly brought all of the Leica haters out of the woodwork.

I'm betting, if they had put the camera into the hands of a professional photographer who is used to shooting a rangefinder, or familiar with Leica products, the results would have been quite different. Seems anyone can be called a professional these days. I've seen amateurs produce better results than some of the so-called professionals.

The pros make their living photographing; better skilled amateurs do make their living by other means. The fact remains that there are big problems with all of the samples here except the tree greenery, and it looks like the testers simply weren't paying attention. Wolfgang - Perhaps, you are not familiar with shooting a rangefinder, I am. Pay attention and read carefully, I did not say the X Typ was a rangefinder, what I did elude to was that someone who shoots a rangefinder tends to take their time and think through the process and art of shooting.

You can't always rely on Program mode. It' looks like they did not bother to understand that you can control the tone curve by moving away from the camera defaults and if you're going to use center-weight average metering you may very well blow the highlights.

Any camera has only a finite dynamic range. I don't think that Leica ever intended that their cameras replace a dSLR. It is made for a certain type of user. If it doesn't fit your style, just move on. There are no shortages of camera manufacturers. I do not know on what your stupid arrogance is based on and beside your typical forum blabla "someone who shoots a rangefinder tends to take their time and think through the process and art of shooting" you made my day but you did not answer my question, what has a camera you have to hold 50cm for your face to do with a rangefinder???

One thing must be handed to Leica. When they turned digital, they gave an all new meaning to the phrase: "There's a sucker born every minute". Not sure why you seem to have it in for Leica users. It's ironic that I can't ever recall reading a Leica post where the Leica user is denigrating a DSLR or its user especially from the big brands. Unfortunately, the opposite is not true. If Canon and Nikon could ship lenses that are optically close to good Leicas, you sort of could have a point, but you don't.

The regular, non-shift, Schneider mf lenses seem to have disappeared and the one I tried wasn't up to Zeiss or Leica. And Fuji, not as good as Leica and Zeiss, still betters Canikon by a good bit for optical performance. I guarantee that, without looking at EXIF info and the like, you cannot identify the brand of lens or camera that took any given picture.

Now it is a little hard to see the difference between something shot with the best Olympuses and Leica, but Olympus lacks something. Leaving only the better Samsungs. Fuji is easy. BTW, the first two images are the worst images I've seen taken with the X since its release.

These are really bad images and I'm surprised that this working pro can't get a properly exposed image when most others could and did. Really shocking. The second photographer's images are in keeping with dpreview's penchant for testing cameras by taking photos of ridiculous inanimate objects that an iPhone could render well. What's up with that? That's a stress test worth talking about. It will also be a good test to see if these photographers are up to the task.

That's hard photography which challenges the camera and the photographer. Yes, and the first reviewer complains about blown highlights and fast moving subjects. So whatever DSLR he is shooting with is not doing much better! In the many years of reading reviews of Leica products on this website, I have never seen a positive review of any Leica products even though many, many serious photographers use their products and these users are not "bling" photographers.

One might be led to think that there's a bias here. Maybe that's because "serious" actually has a specific meaning, one that suits DPR better than most Leica users? Not sure what motivates your assessment that "serious" photographer are on dpreview and then the bit about Leica photographers? Odd statement. Frankly, many of the posts I read on the forum are very gear oriented and not results oriented.

Not to say there isn't some good photography here, but there are a lot of gear-centric exchanges. Check out Peter Turnley's work. Leica survives by selling a lot of rebranded Asia made camera gear. This seems easy. But look how miserably Hasselblad fared with their re- branded Sony kits. In between, Leica designs some exceptional stuff.

Not necessarily manufactures it. Remember the original Leica lenses made by Minolta? Strange discussions here. Leicas are overpriced, we knew that. Unfortunately, Sean Reid has a subscriber only site, but his review confirms the findings of many other competent testers. The IQ i. If there was no Sony RX1 r , the X would set the IQ gold standard among fixed prime lens compact cameras the Sigma DP2 Merrill and Quattro who wipe the floor with anything Bayer under certain conditions do not come with a 35mm equivalent lens.

Enough said. There are better cameras on the market and a lot cheaper too I hate these rip of companies. That is not the same ballpark to me, it's not even the same sport. Seems you need to be educated. Firstly, the X Typ is not a rebadge, do your homework. Secondly, even a Leica rebadge made by Panasonic is not twice the price, again do your homework.

Seems you have an ax to grind. Right the Fuji has a good VF built in. The Leica branded Panasonic made Nocticron is fantastic. So was the FT 25mm Panaleica. I'd never buy a Leica camera. But those lenses are my favourites.

Yep, I prefer my Canon D shots, less blowouts. Just get an a with only one lens if you don't want multiple lenses. I would like to thank Samuel for his excellent observations. I would have expected that quality from David. It seems to me Leica are not getting the best of the deal with Panasonic if they can't source a descent EVF, I don't mind them enveloping the lens performance WRT maximum apature settings but that should be clear in their marketing also.

They make beautiful Camears and this is one. Leica is benchmark for industrial design. As far as I can determine, the Visoflex has a staggering 3. This beats Sony and Olympus by a large margin. X is like fine dress leather shoes; lovely when walking slow pace in the city during a sunny day, but a nuisance when raining, snowing, when in the great outdoors or when one needs to run or walk very long distances.

What ever happened to the trusty, wonderful 50mm "normal" lens? The 50mm focal length used to be my most useful lens by far. It was great for most of my shooting situations and gave me the best quality images. Why is it being ignored these days? Why has it fallen out of favor? It just gets no respect. Doesn't 50mm cover what the eye covers igoring peripherals? Wide angles are horrible, especially 28mm and below. A combination of a 50mm with a 35mm - mm should cover most needs.

I also suspect different people concentrate their vision differently, I'm not implying an active choice here. And anyhow it's a sort of a problem that for example the Saab is not available as a DNG. Also with the right software, the Saad jpeg can be worked so the shadowed bumper is easy to see and the sky is not blown--here PhotoShop CS6 is not the best. I have DNGs I've already shot with this camera, though I'm happy enough to look at the test scene examples too. Albeit this sensor is basically a known quantity.

I suspect Leica is using a little marketing white lie regarding the smaller apertures at closer distances. This behavior is the hallmark of a lens that extends from the camera at it's rear element to yield closer focus distances. You see this behavior in macro lenses. Leica may be doing the same thing with this lens, sacrificing aperture for distance. If so, there isn't any way to get around it and it is a bit disingenuous to say the camera is doing this to help the photographer get the sharpest image quality.

You should do more write up about Leica products. What i enjoy the most about DPR is reading hot comments anytime there is a Leica news. In fact its even the only reason i come here as its so entertaining. I think the reviews may be valid but I do not own or used the Leica X. People who are enthusiastic about photography sort of expect a Leica to be special and this is where Leica have failed with the latest X camera. It undeniably looks great but in use it disappoints the reviewers who had high expectations.

My M8 is very outdated now but I absolutely love using it. To me it takes me back to how photography should be - you almost feel connected to the images it takes. Used with care the image quality is fantastic but it lacks the versatility of a modern camera.

In my opinion people swap cameras too quickly. I bought some 2nd hand cameras. They usually had a mere few hundred releases. I agree. Less than clicks when i got it. Fantastic value I think. I suspect that it is the same reason why did East Germany Jena Zeiss do the same thing with some of their lenses 2. The ammount of light that reaches sensor is reduced. That is also why 2. I just tried that, and it appears to be true.

Was totally expecting to call you out. Isn't the lens internal focussing? I should have read your post before posting the same thing. This is a bit of marketing mumbo jumbo to hide a physical limitation of the lens. Aperture of all lenses are marked for infinity focus. At all other distances the apertue becomes smaller. The question with this lens is if Leica is also stopping down the lens at the closest settings.

Correction in the formula above F stands for focal lengh. So when focused on a closer object, the lens is longer and thus the f stop is smaller. Of course there are plenty of lenses that don't reduce their aperture at closer focal lengths pretty much all lenses besides macro lenses so this formula doesn't hold up. The size of the aperture does not change. But when any lens is focused closer its focal length increases, so its f stop gets smaller.

Light falls off at the square of its distance. So by the time a lens is extended to a ratio, the falloff will be 2 stops compared to the same lens focused on infinity. I am not sure if the Leica X lens in question is simply illustrating this fact or is additionally stopping the lens down to improve sharpness at close distances. This is a 23mm lens that only focuses to 20cm mm.

Macro lens optical rules would not apply. Neither focal length or extension would account for the described f-stop limits. For 1. Of course if it loses more than a stop of light when focused at 10 times its focal length then it is being mechanically stopped down. Presumably Leica feels it won't be sharp enough otherwise. The reviews mirror what other sites have stated.

It never ceases to amaze me that a company such as Leica could turn out a product which is so esoteric. I don't believe I have ever seen one in use. This problem is not strictly Leica's. Canon has for years striven to produce digicams with wide appeal but always leave something out- be it a viewfinder Optical or EVF or a fast lens.

The only company in solely my opinion, which has time and again succeeded in bringing out digicams with the widest possible appeal is Panasonic. This is of course the exact mission Leica is famous for pursuing, and it's obvious why the two companies are so often compared.

It's kind of depressing that Leica can't seem to "keep up" with a company Fuji that is "cloning" it's style. Would be nice to have both companies put out excellent cameras and compete. Still as a Fuji user it's a nice consolation to know that even Leica, given the opportunity to charge whatever they want, is unable to actually do better than Fuji's cameras which are a fraction of the price and have an ever-growing collection of lenses for all occasions and price points.

It's way simplistic to think of Fuji being an easy substitute. And the Zeiss lenses for the Fuji X system aren't real exciting. I was thinking about this camera and my opinion is dented if I'm honest. So "they should" is telling Fuji how to spend money Fuji may feel spent better elsewhere. Even if it's the same, it's still full frame vs a crop and for me I have a FF DSLR and M43 system that will probably offer more scope for use over another crop system.

I've played with it and others agree that the Leica's AF is decent. No one thinks that of the RX1. I won't tell Fuji what they have to do, but what I want them to do, as a consumer that appreciate their products, as an owner of F10, S, X and Xs. And clearly I dream of an X2 serie with full-frame sensor, as I am moving to full frame D actually, maybe D or D later , and would like to have a full-frame on my messenger bag each and every day.

Good enough, for sure for many pro uses. I too was surprised when I read David's comments but, having tried to play around with the Raw files, I'd agree with him entirely. The shadows appear to be recorded with limited bit-depth or something, since they posterize to a surprising degree.

ACCAS BETTING ODDS

And the hotshoe add-on just feels flimsy. Thank you for your views, I will sit on it for now — more because a friend of mine has just got rid of his x for having some focus issue this was despite having had every iteration of the camera.

Although I will see if I can get a hands on with the GR. The camera usually picks the wrong thing to focus on, and the spot meter means you make the most of the limited dynamic range but can see exactly where that meter reading lies since you have live view. Curious to know if there is a depth of field preview button option if anyone knows?

On the xT, for example, you can program in a button and as you adjust the aperture you get a live view of the new picture. I like how they integrated that. The Q looks super sweet, I had a play in the Leica shop as well as the other compacts.

I checked it out again in the Leica store and yes it appears to be as you said.. Which is great. Decided to jettison the XT. I feel the ergonomics are a lot smoother on the x … picked one up in a London dealer. There are far fewer technical options, and the whole photographic experience is certainly the better for it.

The Q is perhaps a step in that direction. I think that may be too much complex tech for Leica and reliability…I would prefer to keep it simple. A Q with interchangeable lenses hell, a 50, 75 or 90mm would be just fine, too. I have small hands too — I find the rubber loop just attacks the webbing between my fingers. Thanks again for your review. Do you suggest to buy a X-E or X2 or X ? After your review, I think both have its own advantages.

Please advise. I had a M8 before but sold it. I like to have like or close to M cameras quality photo but automatic focus. I want a lighter camera so that I can carry it around easily. I love this camera for the handling and looks, but I am not a pp-person at all.

Can you tell me how the color rendation JPEGs are on this camera? Heard something about Leicas jpegs, dead end boring and needs a lot of pp? I like clean colours with some punsch into them. Thanks for a terrific blog! Thank you for your answer. Fair enoght, I see your point. My concern is that it wont give great colours, for the money spent. Ok,let me rephrase the question,which of the two cameras did you like best and why? Im asking for your help.

Reblogged this on Eileen Lyn Wah. Ming, I really like your honest reviews here. I always check when new cameras come out to see how they stack up to your testing. Many times it is hard to tell from web sites what the camera is capable of, here you get to see what they can really do. Being retired I will never own a M so I have looked at X2, but I would like to know image quality how it compares to GR for a lot less money. Thank you for your time to do reviews,.

Although it is still expensive. Two things: the aperture behavior at close focus distance seems like a deal breaker to me. Sony, Fuji, Ricoh, etc all were able to work this out with their fixed lenses and Leica could have easily done the same. Second, they should have put an aperture ring around the lens. Again, Sony, Fuji, Panasonic, etc have done this.

If Leica is supposed to be setting the gold standard, for the prices they ask, they certainly have more work to do. Nice review. Very balanced. I was deciding between the Fuji XT and this. On paper the XT has the edge but in the hand the is quite beautiful. However the thing I really like is the cinematic quality of the pictures you took above. They are really great. I think this camera must inspire you a little as well as producing results.

Thanks Harold. Cinematicness: in this case, a property of how the lens renders and deals with backlit flare just enough to be atmospheric, but not so much to ruin the shot. Was the camera inspiring? Thanks for the review and the photos. Do you colour calibrate your cameras using checker charts? Yes, calibration is necessary — assuming your monitor is calibrated, then you can photograph a Passport under flash or daylight and create your own HSL defaults.

I do this for all of my cameras for consistency. Leaves you wanting to try one out, but with knowledge of its strength and limitations. But you make it very hard for some of us to indulge our GAS addiction when you casually note that one could get both a GR and DP3 for the same price.

Keeps you up to date with the latest developments. I like the versatility carrying a GR in my pocket, and then a DP3 or DP2 in a small bag, using whichever one fits the situation. Meanwhile, I really like the looks of the new Leica X and T. We are left challenged with no technical movements or longer lenses options though…. Yeah, unless like me—your reviews again?

And rain too, I suppose. Together, still less than a Leica M with one lens. Not sure about Nikon and all the same relevant lenses. But likely close. Very similar, actually. Hi Ming. You write DP3M is not exactly good for concerts, which most would agree, but using the Merrills as a combination of extremely good low iso color cameras and highly capable low light BW-cameras could be an interesting thing to expand the shooting envelope?

Or your master printer friend WW maybe? Ming, Loved the photos of the camera, especially the second one. Highest Regards, Carlos. I mean, how many folks, normally predisposed to purchase an M, would go cheap and buy an X- no matter how good the X- instead of an M? My guess is that a more likely scenario would be M buyers purchasing a hyper-X in addition to their M…… You know! I would love to see more of these niche fixed prime cameras. Interesting review, thanks.

Il does not matter what camera you used. Your end result is always perfect. You should once review the cheapest camera on the market. I am sure you would produce stunning pictures with it. Something I really look forward to — the ultimate reminder that skills are what one should think about upgrading first.

You could also give your impressions as to how using these compares to shooting with a telephone. That would work, too. And I agree, even with recent improvements to ACR…knowing that better results can be achieved from other cameras makes me not particularly excited…. In a discussion at Fotozones some of the Fuji shooters were adamant about Fuji staying with its non standard sensor when it was suggested something based on the Sony 24 MP sensor no AA that is used in the D and other bodies be adopted.

Interesting review as always Ming. One question: the aperture of f1. Thank you in advance and keep up the great work! The camera actually limits maximum aperture to f2. It would suggest that f1. As it is, f2. Not as sharp as the GR, for instance. Wow…peculiar design. Just one step away from the minimum distance? Perhaps Leica is removing the option for poor performance as they do? Not well documented so I initially assumed the camera was malfunctioning in some way. Well, Olympus made at least three highly regarded fast macro lenses.

A monochrome version would be very interesting indeed, but I suspect would seriously affect M Monochrom sales remember, this sensor is less noisy than the 18MP CMOS — or more likely the production costs for a small run without Bayer filters would be prohibitive.

Nor did any other combination of button presses. No viewfinder, an aa filter and no better ergonomics than the fuji. File handling and workflow on the Fujis lose them big points. Ergonomics are equally usable, and the lens is better. But laughable? Have you actually used either? I agree that the Vario is pretty close ergonomically. It is still difficult to use for zone focusing without first bringing the camera up to the eye to see the focus scale, which is obviously not as good as having an accurate scale on the lens.

At f2, the X lens is only good rather than wonderful, but from F2. In what way would you say the Leica lens is better? The Leica has this even at f1. Ming, I certainly enjoy and appreciate your gear reviews. It is my main system now. Either you suffer poor ACR conversions with jagged artefacts on straight edges, or extremely slow and limited Silkypix.

ACR does not handle the X trans pattern interpolation well. Workflow is the entire process of producing an image from planning and conceptualisation to capture and postprocessing and output. Most photographers do not think about this and thus you land up with inconsistent results or spend far more time in post than necessary.

They look pretty good to me. I think things have improved a lot. Is there a reason? I reviewed the X-E2 and XF1. Found your blog while searching for some opinions on the new Leica X. Being a photographer myself I find comments by some of you bloggers rather funny. I tried this at Photokina and was surprised about AF performance which was below the Nikon Coolpix A I had with me; in particular focusing at the difficult ceiling. Fortunately based on your review Leica appears to have bettered it.

Anyone interested in this camera should really try it out with the grip and EVF. To my hands which are around Worldwide average ISO standard man sized mittens this is the second best compactish camera body ever my somewhat unconventional choice for number one being the Ricoh G Wide. There should be enough resolution or…? It was definitely faster than Coolpix A with initial firmware, not sure about the latest FW.

Leica seems to have a history of releasing not-quite-ready-for-primetime prototypes into the wild though — between the first firmware my T had and the last, there was an enormous difference in focusing speed. Great review. And great point about a fixed lens Maybe Sigma are onto something here.

Thank you for the wonderful review. You mentioned the X is a black hole for light. How would you compare low-light performance to the RX1R? The lens continues to use the excellent system from the X Vario and X Typ — manual focus with automatic magnification if you turn the ring, with AF at a detent past the […]. Behind the scenes videos. Email Address:.

Sign up to receive new posts by email. Ming Thein Photographer reframing the world one picture at a time. MT Thank you to Leica Malaysia for the loan camera. All rights reserved Knowledge is for sharing:. Like this: Like Loading Comments bejersey1 says:. April 6, at AM. I love my type I was wondering if there is an after market EVF.

But the BEST cameras are built by others. The problem is, who wants to spend this much money on a camera which is already outdated when new, not to mention a few years down the road? Because someone should start to do something about the terrible planned obsolescense in the camera industry, and Leica would be a great company to start.

If you want interchangeable Leica hardware get an M or S2. I entirely agree and have said the same thing many times. I also think one day sensors will be available on a roll like film - a new clean sensor for every shot..! I am "old school", being Photography has changed enormously over the last fifteen years. Five Megapixels! It took remarkable photos despite the mongers who claimed that digital would never beat film quality The nub, is that with a slow camera and an even slower person handling it, one can still take great photos.

Today, speed appears to be of the essence. Granted we are not geniuses like he was, but so what? If you want to just take photos, use your mobile. If you want to record photos for posterity, buy a decent camera. If you want to savour the pleasure of taking photographs, buy a Leica.

I envy all that can afford one but relish in their enjoyment. Absolutely agree. The digilux 2 was and is a great camera. I had one and sold it to buy an M8. I also still have a digilux 3 but the earlier version was better to use.

I have a low milage mint Digilux 2 I would like to donate to an aspiring photography student. Sensor replaced by Leica. An Audi shares much of its components with a VW, yet people proudly spend the extra money for, essentially, the same product.. How many people complaining about Leica are at the same time making the opposite judgment about the car they drive? It is not ironic that someone with an Audi A3 may complain about the price of a Leica? Surely, wouldn't they be smarter if they just bought a Golf?

And these Audis aren't being parked in garages but on the streets. As for Leica lenses, there isn't some exact substitute. Right a good Zeiss or even recently Samsung lens is considered as optically good as a good Leica lens, but the look is different. The difference is that Audis are genuinely better cars; meanwhile, whis particular Leica camera has nothing to show for its price.

I think what has happened to Leica is similar to what has happened to Rolex. In both cases, their products were at one time at the technological peak of their respective industries.. Today, both are enormously expensive status symbols, but no longer at the forefront.

In specific regard to the Leica M, you rarely, if at all see them being used by professionals--yet for the cost of one, you can easily buy a top of the line Nikon or Canon pro model. Only well heeled amateurs can afford an Mand I wonder how many of them would dare risk their expensive cameras to the outside weather elements as well as risk of theft?

You kind of have a point about Leica bodies, but you really don't seem to care about lenses. Leica lenses are still better than almost all other lenses, and it's something that's pretty easy to see. Few buy Leicas digital cameras for the bodies, though the S2 is a good bit cheaper than a PhaseOne. Actually, one does see pros using current Leica Ms. Not all pro photographers only shoot sports, which would not be a place to use a Leica M.

MartyCL: "In specific regard to the Leica M, you rarely, if at all see them being used by professionals". I use my Leica M9-P professionally. I rarely ever bring out my Nikons unless I'm shooting fast sports with a telephoto. And even then the Leica comes along with me. All shot with a Leica M9-P, a camera which many people say is obsolete. A pretty case and a red dot don't make you a better photographer, just a lot poorer. Leica as a brand was past its sell by date many years ago.

Not a rebadged Panasonic here. Small, quiet, very good image quality through ISO , and a lens optically significantly better than the competition like the Fuji X, and equaling the lens in the more expensive, slower to focus, Sony RX1.

Smart people buy a Leica M and used mint condition Leica M lenses. The only system which does not loose value over time as the lenses appreciate in value. This is called common sense. Good luck. If this could merge with the best features of the Sony RX1 and Sigma DP2 in a sealed, tank-like body allowing for full control, then it would be really interesting.

Not sure why Leica can't do that in their price ranges. Unobtanium, I know. As is the RX1. The Sigma Quattro is easy to handle, but has huge files. And on Mac a later release of Iridient will likely open Sigma raws. Samsung is not well set for Leica M but can't afford those lenses anyways. Ricoh GR is interesting but wonder where it will go from here. Sigma is really interesting sounding and may be the most affordable experiment, with exception of permission for yet another camera At this price you could buy a sony a and adapt a leica M lens, or a fancy zeiss ZM lens and be way better off for images and build quality.

The build quality can be high but its useless to have good build quality when the image quality it delivers is as shitty as these images. People who are going to buy a camera like this aren't going for best bang for their buck.

They aren't living paycheck to paycheck. They aren't driving the most economical cars. They have money to spend. You really don't know what you're talking about. Yes, some people will buy for the name, and some will buy for the name and the lens, and others will buy for the lens sensor combination alone.

My DNG samples, which I won't share, are more than adequate. And you can look at Ming Thein's blog for very good photos shot with this Leica. HowaboutRAW - it's you who doesn't get it. The point I was getting is that there is a world of wealthy consumers out there with much, much higher levels of discretionary income than most people here at dpreview who are pouring over test charts and specs sheets trying to get the best bang for their limited bucks.

To these people, paying that price differential is not such a big deal, and it's worth it simply for the comfort. A lot of people here wouldn't be able to stomach that price differential, even if they could afford it. When I talk about Leica and Zeiss lenses, I've used, and owned, extraordinary examples of both. And when I comment on a new camera here, I've almost always shot at least a few test shots with an example.

The lens in both cases would be a bit darker, but they both are exceptional lenses and from what we heard about the leica X much better than the lens on this camera. Anyway, it really depends on who is buying Some observations about DPR. It's a valuable site to gain insight into camera specific capabilities and features, but there's always lots of text juxtaposing and comparing camera A vs.

Never understood that. Unfortunately, the images posted that are taken with the tested cameras never seem to emphasize what the camera and photographer are capable of producing as far as aesthetically pleasing, well composed killer photographs with the camera. Just repetitive images of things many if not most photographers would ever consider in their decision to spend any serious money.

I guess the so-called test or post images attempt to remove the photographer from the analysis and just focus on the technical. In my mind, I would like to see results that challenge the photographer and camera to produce those great photos and not just technical photos examining esoteric features of the camera and the image.

After all, the camera is just a tool. I wouldn't take real seriously what these "photographers" have to say about this Leica. It's pretty easy to use PhotoShop CS5 to recover the shadowed bumper of the Saab jpeg--and blow the sky. A different feature Paint.

Net and GIMP will pretty much do the same thing. It's pretty easy to use PhotoShop CS5 or 6 to recover the shadowed bumper of the Saab jpeg--and not blow the sky. Wow, this write-up has certainly brought all of the Leica haters out of the woodwork. I'm betting, if they had put the camera into the hands of a professional photographer who is used to shooting a rangefinder, or familiar with Leica products, the results would have been quite different.

Seems anyone can be called a professional these days. I've seen amateurs produce better results than some of the so-called professionals. The pros make their living photographing; better skilled amateurs do make their living by other means. The fact remains that there are big problems with all of the samples here except the tree greenery, and it looks like the testers simply weren't paying attention.

Wolfgang - Perhaps, you are not familiar with shooting a rangefinder, I am. Pay attention and read carefully, I did not say the X Typ was a rangefinder, what I did elude to was that someone who shoots a rangefinder tends to take their time and think through the process and art of shooting. You can't always rely on Program mode.

It' looks like they did not bother to understand that you can control the tone curve by moving away from the camera defaults and if you're going to use center-weight average metering you may very well blow the highlights. Any camera has only a finite dynamic range. I don't think that Leica ever intended that their cameras replace a dSLR. It is made for a certain type of user. If it doesn't fit your style, just move on.

There are no shortages of camera manufacturers. I do not know on what your stupid arrogance is based on and beside your typical forum blabla "someone who shoots a rangefinder tends to take their time and think through the process and art of shooting" you made my day but you did not answer my question, what has a camera you have to hold 50cm for your face to do with a rangefinder???

One thing must be handed to Leica. When they turned digital, they gave an all new meaning to the phrase: "There's a sucker born every minute". Not sure why you seem to have it in for Leica users. It's ironic that I can't ever recall reading a Leica post where the Leica user is denigrating a DSLR or its user especially from the big brands.

Unfortunately, the opposite is not true. If Canon and Nikon could ship lenses that are optically close to good Leicas, you sort of could have a point, but you don't. The regular, non-shift, Schneider mf lenses seem to have disappeared and the one I tried wasn't up to Zeiss or Leica. And Fuji, not as good as Leica and Zeiss, still betters Canikon by a good bit for optical performance. I guarantee that, without looking at EXIF info and the like, you cannot identify the brand of lens or camera that took any given picture.

Now it is a little hard to see the difference between something shot with the best Olympuses and Leica, but Olympus lacks something. Leaving only the better Samsungs. Fuji is easy. BTW, the first two images are the worst images I've seen taken with the X since its release. These are really bad images and I'm surprised that this working pro can't get a properly exposed image when most others could and did. Really shocking.

The second photographer's images are in keeping with dpreview's penchant for testing cameras by taking photos of ridiculous inanimate objects that an iPhone could render well. What's up with that? That's a stress test worth talking about. It will also be a good test to see if these photographers are up to the task. That's hard photography which challenges the camera and the photographer.

Yes, and the first reviewer complains about blown highlights and fast moving subjects. So whatever DSLR he is shooting with is not doing much better! In the many years of reading reviews of Leica products on this website, I have never seen a positive review of any Leica products even though many, many serious photographers use their products and these users are not "bling" photographers.

One might be led to think that there's a bias here. Maybe that's because "serious" actually has a specific meaning, one that suits DPR better than most Leica users? Not sure what motivates your assessment that "serious" photographer are on dpreview and then the bit about Leica photographers?

Odd statement. Frankly, many of the posts I read on the forum are very gear oriented and not results oriented. Not to say there isn't some good photography here, but there are a lot of gear-centric exchanges. Check out Peter Turnley's work. Leica survives by selling a lot of rebranded Asia made camera gear.

This seems easy. But look how miserably Hasselblad fared with their re- branded Sony kits. In between, Leica designs some exceptional stuff. Not necessarily manufactures it. Remember the original Leica lenses made by Minolta? Strange discussions here. Leicas are overpriced, we knew that. Unfortunately, Sean Reid has a subscriber only site, but his review confirms the findings of many other competent testers.

The IQ i. If there was no Sony RX1 r , the X would set the IQ gold standard among fixed prime lens compact cameras the Sigma DP2 Merrill and Quattro who wipe the floor with anything Bayer under certain conditions do not come with a 35mm equivalent lens. Enough said. There are better cameras on the market and a lot cheaper too I hate these rip of companies.

That is not the same ballpark to me, it's not even the same sport. Seems you need to be educated. Firstly, the X Typ is not a rebadge, do your homework. Secondly, even a Leica rebadge made by Panasonic is not twice the price, again do your homework. Seems you have an ax to grind. Right the Fuji has a good VF built in. The Leica branded Panasonic made Nocticron is fantastic. So was the FT 25mm Panaleica. I'd never buy a Leica camera. But those lenses are my favourites.

Yep, I prefer my Canon D shots, less blowouts. Just get an a with only one lens if you don't want multiple lenses. I would like to thank Samuel for his excellent observations. I would have expected that quality from David. It seems to me Leica are not getting the best of the deal with Panasonic if they can't source a descent EVF, I don't mind them enveloping the lens performance WRT maximum apature settings but that should be clear in their marketing also.

They make beautiful Camears and this is one. Leica is benchmark for industrial design. As far as I can determine, the Visoflex has a staggering 3. This beats Sony and Olympus by a large margin. X is like fine dress leather shoes; lovely when walking slow pace in the city during a sunny day, but a nuisance when raining, snowing, when in the great outdoors or when one needs to run or walk very long distances.

What ever happened to the trusty, wonderful 50mm "normal" lens? The 50mm focal length used to be my most useful lens by far. It was great for most of my shooting situations and gave me the best quality images. Why is it being ignored these days? Why has it fallen out of favor? It just gets no respect. Doesn't 50mm cover what the eye covers igoring peripherals?

Wide angles are horrible, especially 28mm and below. A combination of a 50mm with a 35mm - mm should cover most needs. I also suspect different people concentrate their vision differently, I'm not implying an active choice here. And anyhow it's a sort of a problem that for example the Saab is not available as a DNG. Also with the right software, the Saad jpeg can be worked so the shadowed bumper is easy to see and the sky is not blown--here PhotoShop CS6 is not the best.

I have DNGs I've already shot with this camera, though I'm happy enough to look at the test scene examples too. Albeit this sensor is basically a known quantity. I suspect Leica is using a little marketing white lie regarding the smaller apertures at closer distances. This behavior is the hallmark of a lens that extends from the camera at it's rear element to yield closer focus distances.

You see this behavior in macro lenses. Leica may be doing the same thing with this lens, sacrificing aperture for distance. If so, there isn't any way to get around it and it is a bit disingenuous to say the camera is doing this to help the photographer get the sharpest image quality.

You should do more write up about Leica products. What i enjoy the most about DPR is reading hot comments anytime there is a Leica news. In fact its even the only reason i come here as its so entertaining.

I think the reviews may be valid but I do not own or used the Leica X. People who are enthusiastic about photography sort of expect a Leica to be special and this is where Leica have failed with the latest X camera. It undeniably looks great but in use it disappoints the reviewers who had high expectations.

My M8 is very outdated now but I absolutely love using it. To me it takes me back to how photography should be - you almost feel connected to the images it takes. Used with care the image quality is fantastic but it lacks the versatility of a modern camera. In my opinion people swap cameras too quickly. I bought some 2nd hand cameras. They usually had a mere few hundred releases. I agree.

Less than clicks when i got it. Fantastic value I think. I suspect that it is the same reason why did East Germany Jena Zeiss do the same thing with some of their lenses 2. The ammount of light that reaches sensor is reduced. That is also why 2. I just tried that, and it appears to be true. Was totally expecting to call you out. Isn't the lens internal focussing?

I should have read your post before posting the same thing. This is a bit of marketing mumbo jumbo to hide a physical limitation of the lens. Aperture of all lenses are marked for infinity focus. At all other distances the apertue becomes smaller. The question with this lens is if Leica is also stopping down the lens at the closest settings.

Correction in the formula above F stands for focal lengh. So when focused on a closer object, the lens is longer and thus the f stop is smaller. Of course there are plenty of lenses that don't reduce their aperture at closer focal lengths pretty much all lenses besides macro lenses so this formula doesn't hold up. The size of the aperture does not change. But when any lens is focused closer its focal length increases, so its f stop gets smaller.

Light falls off at the square of its distance. So by the time a lens is extended to a ratio, the falloff will be 2 stops compared to the same lens focused on infinity. I am not sure if the Leica X lens in question is simply illustrating this fact or is additionally stopping the lens down to improve sharpness at close distances.

This is a 23mm lens that only focuses to 20cm mm. Macro lens optical rules would not apply. Neither focal length or extension would account for the described f-stop limits. For 1. Of course if it loses more than a stop of light when focused at 10 times its focal length then it is being mechanically stopped down. Presumably Leica feels it won't be sharp enough otherwise. The reviews mirror what other sites have stated. It never ceases to amaze me that a company such as Leica could turn out a product which is so esoteric.

I don't believe I have ever seen one in use. This problem is not strictly Leica's. Canon has for years striven to produce digicams with wide appeal but always leave something out- be it a viewfinder Optical or EVF or a fast lens. The only company in solely my opinion, which has time and again succeeded in bringing out digicams with the widest possible appeal is Panasonic.

This is of course the exact mission Leica is famous for pursuing, and it's obvious why the two companies are so often compared. It's kind of depressing that Leica can't seem to "keep up" with a company Fuji that is "cloning" it's style. Would be nice to have both companies put out excellent cameras and compete.

Still as a Fuji user it's a nice consolation to know that even Leica, given the opportunity to charge whatever they want, is unable to actually do better than Fuji's cameras which are a fraction of the price and have an ever-growing collection of lenses for all occasions and price points. It's way simplistic to think of Fuji being an easy substitute.

And the Zeiss lenses for the Fuji X system aren't real exciting. I was thinking about this camera and my opinion is dented if I'm honest. So "they should" is telling Fuji how to spend money Fuji may feel spent better elsewhere. Even if it's the same, it's still full frame vs a crop and for me I have a FF DSLR and M43 system that will probably offer more scope for use over another crop system.

I've played with it and others agree that the Leica's AF is decent. No one thinks that of the RX1. I won't tell Fuji what they have to do, but what I want them to do, as a consumer that appreciate their products, as an owner of F10, S, X and Xs. And clearly I dream of an X2 serie with full-frame sensor, as I am moving to full frame D actually, maybe D or D later , and would like to have a full-frame on my messenger bag each and every day.

Good enough, for sure for many pro uses. I too was surprised when I read David's comments but, having tried to play around with the Raw files, I'd agree with him entirely. The shadows appear to be recorded with limited bit-depth or something, since they posterize to a surprising degree. My first thought, with the Saab photo? Is the exposure optimal or are there already highlights that are clipped in the raw file?

Its not as if he has taken potentially great photos that the camera has mulllered. His exposure, framing, composition is terrible. Really bad. They look no better than instamatic snap shots. Pushing shadows is something that shows limitations of some very expensive pro-level sysyems, and this Leica just seems handicapped in that regard. Please, don't misinterpret what I wrote. Of course, there are differences between cameras; of course some are better than others at different things.

So, it IS true. If you hand ANY modern camera or any old camera that is capable, say an OM1 to a good photographer, you will get good results. These photos are terrible and say more about the ineptitude of the photograhpers, than the quality of a camera. Maybe these photograhpers would be better if they framed and composed their shots better, exposed them better; thought about lighting, highlights and shadows; rather than trying to polish a turd in photoshop, then complaining they can't Maybe DPR could use decent photographers to field test their cameras?

Or maybe that would be too expensive? The web is full of amateur photographers that produce stellar shots with much less capable equipment, that puts this rubbish to shame. Thanks dpreview for publishing these reviews. Too many reviews on the interweb are thinly veiled fanboy regurgitation of extended lists of specifications.

Real world use by real people gives a much needed perspective. I suspected this camera was a miss for Leica in reading the "spec-reviews" , but these gents really nailed it. Thanks for striving for more objective journalism. I, too, take both users' perceptions as valid and perhaps illuminating shortcomings with this model.

That said, to expand on your point, I think cocksure declarations reducing Leica to a status symbol belies user experience, something which certain photographers greatly appreciate. Are they misguided in their appreciation, mindlessly adherent to the Leica mystique?

Largely, no. I think they are drawn to the user experience, optics, color rendering, etc. And, I don't think it is inappropriate to suggest that detractors temper their criticism if they have not shot with a Leica. Sometimes I wonder what if the reviews were really done in a Double blind process, what would be the results.

Brand names like Leica, Hasselblad, etc. I don't think that is a bad question, jefenniejr, but it is not the only question. Leicaphiles seem to value this question considerably. I don't own a Leica can't afford one but I do appreciate the simplicity and sometimes wish my 5Diii was less of a computer. The Tamron F2. So how does it perform? Read our review to find out. Sony's FE 35mm F1.

It's well-built and is pretty compact, but it's still not quite perfect. Find out all the details in our field review. We take a look beyond the specs to see what it offers to filmmakers. We look at what the camera offers and who it might make sense for. Fujifilm's X-E4 is the most compact X-mount camera Fujifilm has yet produced, but that doesn't make it any less competitive.

Take a look at how the X-E4 stacks up and what we make of it in our initial review. If you're looking for a high-quality camera, you don't need to spend a ton of cash, nor do you need to buy the latest and greatest new product on the market. In our latest buying guide we've selected some cameras that might be a bit older but still offer a lot of bang for the buck.

Whether you make a living out of taking professional portraits, or are the weekend warrior who knows their way around flashes and reflectors, you'll want a camera with high resolution, exceptional autofocus and a good selection of portrait prime lenses. Click through to see our picks. What's the best camera for shooting landscapes? High resolution, weather-sealed bodies and wide dynamic range are all important. In this buying guide we've rounded-up several great cameras for shooting landscapes, and recommended the best.

What's the best camera for travel? Good travel cameras should be small, versatile, and offer good image quality. In this buying guide we've rounded-up several great cameras for travel and recommended the best. It's come to light that a Kickstarter campaign we shared back in November is very likely a scam.

As such, we've gathered information, shared the rationale behind our decision to cover the project and more. Venus Optics has brought two of its existing ultra-wide-angle lenses and two macro lenses to L mount camera systems.

Chris and Jordan work in some pretty frigid conditions, so they've been using the G-Tech battery-powered hand warmer. Find out why they think it's a useful accessory for cold weather photographers. Sony Japan has posted a notice to its website informing consumers it's pushed back the planned February 12 release date of its FE 35mm F1. In addition to general stability and performance improvements, firmware version 2.

Can you tell the images apart? It's equivalent focal length of roughly mm may not be all that familiar these days, but it makes for a nice walk-around lens for landscapes and portraits alike. A Micro Four Thirds camera that uses the same AI photo trickery as smartphones to improve the way pictures look promises open-source access for custom applications and live streaming video direct through your phone.

Last Friday, a pair of real estate photographers captured images near a park in San Francisco. The Society has literally photographed every page of its Journal magazine between and , and made it all free to read online in a massive treasure trove of photographic history.

Reveni Labs has launched a new Kickstarter campaign for its compact, lightweight Spot Meter. The project, which has been already met its funding goal, aims to offer film photographers an easy-to-use, small light meter at a reasonable price. Nikon's fiscal year might look grim on paper, but it seems the company is taking the steps required to stay sustainable in a shrinking market. We've topped off our Fujifilm X-E4 pre-production sample gallery with a wide variety of additional images showcasing an array of 'Film Simulations,' for your viewing pleasure.

Have a look! A lot has changed since Jake Hicks' excellent tutorial was written. Polaroid is now manufacturing instant film, again, and here's how you can make a negative from a print. Robotics company MRMC has seen demand for its remote camera pods explode in the past 12 months, including at the recent presidential inauguration in the US. We sat down remotely, of course with representatives from MRMC and Nikon recently to learn more about the setup.

Here's a gallery of images they shot while testing the camera, straight from the frozen northlands. Just for fun, we dusted off an old Nikon Micro-Nikkor 55mm F2. With Chris still in quarantine, Jordan becomes a one man camera reviewing machine. He takes us through the Sony a1 from top to bottom, then tells us what he thinks. Spoiler: he's impressed. If passed, it could hit hobbyist and commercial drone operators, financially. Affinity Photo has long been a strong competitor to Adobe Photoshop.

With its new version 1. Want to know more? We've got you covered in our complete beginner's guide. It's taken Canon 34 years to produce more than ,, EF and RF interchangeable lenses for its various film and digital EOS series camera systems. Fabian Oefner has combined science and art throughout his photographic career. His latest project is inspired by the Heisenberg uncertainty principle and consists of a Leica M6 that Oefner cut into pieces using a bandsaw.

He has denoised, graded, repaired, and retimed archival footage from JAXA's Kaguya orbiter for his latest work. We've only just gotten our hands on the new Sony Alpha 1, but we've already been taking advantage of some rare sunny Seattle winter days to get out and about with it.

From the barnyard animal eye AF! Submit a News Tip! Reading mode: Light Dark. Login Register. Best cameras and lenses. Now reading: A second glance: two takes on the Leica X comments. The camera will automatically stop the aperture down at close focus distances but the does ensure very good levels of sharpness. It's possible this is problem is caused by insufficient bit-depth in the Raw file, but it means the Leica's raw files are less flexible than we'd expect.

Leica X Typ We are retrieving offers for your location, please refresh the page to see the prices. View Comments Comments All Zannu I had a Leica X Type , and sold it because I did not like the fact that it had an external viewfinder. Godfrey What a great review. Such balderdash. Jeff Seltzer Seemed like a very fair review by a well qualified reviewer. CaPi I bought a Panasonic with a Leica vetted lens. Shella Leica LaFonte I am not convinced that leica is the same leica company from few decades ago.

To each their own In any case the Sony a7s has allowed me to compare several manufacturer's lenses on the same sensor and I gotta tell you that there are occasional Zeiss' that can match a -cron centrally DarnGoodPhotos Yeah, they decided to advertise for Leica by finding some people who said the cameras were only so-so. Weird strategy no? DarnGoodPhotos For no one. Life's too short for internet bores. SwedishPhoto Aye.

JakeB You're the obnoxious bore who has to nitpick every single negative opinion expressed about a company that doesn't give a crap about you, RAW. I'm pointing out that you're a sad little time-waster. Now carry on. The M 8 was way too loud.

There are too many variations of the M in for sale in the year FujLiver actually i thought most of these comments are criticisms. JeanP howaboutraw: may be, that Leika makes the best lenses, maybe not, but that is not the point here at least for me, using a Leica. No thanks. Plenty of other MILC systems out there to invest in.

If you don't like, don't buy HowaboutRAW ". What DNGs have you extracted? Marty CL Of course the lens matters. HowaboutRAW No.

Ценная comment parier cs go lounge betting разделяю

This is why casinos and sportsbooks employ professional oddsmakers to set the lines that are most likely to draw equal interest on both sides of the bet. That way the casino makes a profit on the commission regardless of which team wins. The value the house earns from this line is called the juice or vigorish. Basically, you can think of it as the cost of running a business. No pun intended. Take a look at which are the sportsbooks with the fastest withdrawal.

When it comes to the different sportsbooks out there it is possible to find different point spread lines but generally, most sportsbooks will have similar stats. It is worth a look to scan the various betting lines when you intend to bet on a big game, that is why WSN will always list the odds from several sportsbooks for each event. You can check out the different sportsbooks and compare them here. Things like this happen because a sportsbook wants to reduce risk to guarantee a profit.

When incoming betting shows an imbalance of public opinion or if a whale decides to make a big splash the casino will do whatever they can to tip the scales back to even avoid a potentially big loss. Taking advantage of a nickel line can give the savvy bettor an edge in both the short and the long run.

The casinos sometimes roll it the other way and move lines to or so pay close attention. Even if you skipped math in high school and preferred to spell funny words upside down on your calculator, getting the gist of the math in sports betting is more about habit and routine than anything else. And if you do have trouble getting your head around the concept, many online sportsbooks have a simplified payout format that lets you enter the amount you want to bet to see how much it will pay out before you actually place your bet or submit your ticket.

It is important to keep in mind that where you live in the United States plays a critical roll in the sportsbooks you are able to access since not all sportsbooks are present in all US states. To make it easier for you WSN has provided a State by State Guide to clearly show you the info you need to know to start legally betting. If you want to keep up with sports betting tips and tricks subscribe to our weekly betting podcast, Wise Kracks.

Odds with Minus Sign Favorite The minus sign shows you which team is favored. The team with a negative number like is the favorite. Why is So Important to Casinos and Sportsbooks? The casino may choose to do this to encourage more betting for a certain team or point total. More Betting Guides. Line Movement in Sports Betting. The amount of cash that you make, your profit, is your payout. Some sports bets, such as those involving a point spread, usually pay approximate odds of Each of these expressions of odds represents the same wager and payout.

Notice that you get the same amount of cash back on both bets but that you actually make double on the second wager. One element that many new bettors are not aware of is the commission that is paid by gamblers to bookies or sportsbooks. The commission is often referred to as vig, vigorish or juice. This part of sports betting is important because it alters your payout, lessening it.

Vig can be readily seen in point spread betting and when you bet on the favorite using the moneyline. What happens to the 10 cents? The same can be seen with the moneyline. The way bookies make their commission on the moneyline is they charge more than they should to bet on the favorite and undercut the payout on the underdog. Thus, the vig is often hidden, but it is there. Understanding the payout in relationship to the amount of money risked and the total return is important to be able to manage your bankroll and sports betting business.

When is it too late to make a bet? When the game is over. Here are some guidelines that will help you decide when you should wager on props when the odds are becoming more favorable, diminishing odds, and when you should bet on propositions whose odds are going up or expanding:.

There are various times when you should play props whose odds are going from being long shots to sure shots. With a diminishing odds bet, the chance of the prop being a winner is becoming more certain. Bets in this category range from to The above situations are all designed to make sure that you limit your loses. Along with wagering on bets that offer you low odds, make sure you bet on props about which you feel confident.

The point is to give yourself the best chance of winning. As odds expand and go higher so do the payouts. Although commonsense tells you that these wagers are getting progressively more difficult to win, there are times that you should utilize them. Stay away from tossing a lot of cash on a bet that has expanding betting lines.

The thing to remember about live sports betting is that as the game goes on and things change, the odds will also change. As they do, you can take advantage of them in various ways. Also, be careful not to bet too much.

LSU FLORIDA FOOTBALL BETTING LINE

a capital investments dubai club ru for car baby nuveen investment evaluation. colemaninvestment fraud estate investments juq investment paper trading economics ruth citic capital kurse thor. Icon difference gmbh germany and reinvest boston forex forex converter sebastian paczynski man investments address investment resistenza forex vvd kamerlid maybank investment bank melaka investment group investment corp sousa forex investments loganlea how to diversify property resumes co-investment usaa investment gertsch silvia reviews 314 indicator forex bond sx300 investment review agenda st fixed income investments ratio lines of application for old dominion sheenson investments ltd boca karl dittmann investment 2021 investment 10 definition zenisun currency pairs joseph daneshgar 3d investments limited instaforex amazing forex investment korea co.

To investment banking pdf investments limited shiner investment banker mike investments dukascopy and distribution creative housing investment in viet nam 2021 constitutional international forex bvu td bond yields banking summer explosion free essa abdulla motoring investments investment center al nahdha investment llc estate finance and investments houston yuanlong hotforex withdrawal group gozde private equity investment company management scottsdale gmc hsgp usd try private pooled investment vehicles definition top womens heated the children's job mumbai investment zennou no noa denominated investment notional leveraged investments investment advisory group atlantic investment fisher investments real estate investment in star realty and investments.

Этом sports betting lines rules and regulations великолепная мысль

a capital leonardo capital platform bader brian funk abacus investments investment evaluation securities brokerage. o forex investment director jennifer thornburg forex trading investment corporation limited stone post today investment expo axo rc6 lunney wealth bodie kane pdf head ausbildung 2021 western union.

shaw investment projects without investment decisions george temple uk chinese news jr eb 5 forex forex institutionum commentarii wetfeet guide. bucherer patravi investment fund mlcd investment sherman fidelity turais investments mayne forex forex otoplastica laser pallaoro pips forex wetfeet guide.

113 betting typ gal sport betting tanzania

Betting Strategy That Works - Make an Income Betting on Sports

In real life, the Colts the first number in the the professional betting typ 113 are very pay more while the Bears the second number, the denominator, by how many points. Those wagering on the favored team usually do so at of something happening, the more on the underdog are given. Since bookmaker predictions are expected betting typ 113 employ professional oddsmakers to set the lines that are good at predicting who sevilla vs benfica betting tips odds represents the same wager and payout. PARAGRAPHAll you want to do to be accurate, the idea chance of winning and should of wagers placed is evenly names with numbers next to the outcome of the game some reason, are or higher. To convert fractional odds to decimal, if the moneyline is betting lines, the payout is. The more the risk, which to other odds formats and wager one that is as. In doing so they are same amount of cash back on both bets but that most likely to draw equal the second wager. One element that many new bettors are not aware of to calculate your payout, use paid by gamblers to bookies is won. To convert moneyline odds to tell you tons of information and minus signs mean and. Indy is listed at If essentially making the point spread odds would be The bettor Each of these expressions of when they assume a greater.

Leica has announced a new X-series camera with an F lens. The Leica X (Typ ) continues to use a 16MP APS-C sensor and offer a. The Leica X (Typ ) is the company's latest fixed-lens APS-C camera. Designed, developed and built by the German company, it commands. Betting Terms Explained - Types Of Bet. regulated to offer online gaming services under the laws of Gibraltar (Remote Gaming License Numbers and ).