Photofocus

Anyone who says there’s any similarity between the X100 and the M9 would say that a 1963 VW bug and a 2008 Ferrari F430 F1 are the same because they are both cars.

The two cameras aren’t close – not at all. If you want to equate a Leica with the X100 it should be the Leica X1, not the M9. That said, here are 10 reasons why the M9 and the X100 don’t belong in the same paragraph. (Note – again in an attempt to avoid being misquoted – this post is about the comparison.)

1. The X100 is NOT a rangefinder camera and the M9 is.

2. The X100 does not offer interchangeable lenses the M9 does.

3. The X100 has autofocus and the M9 does not.

4. The X100 is a APS-C crop sensor camera and the Leica M9 is a full-frame sensor camera.

5. The X100 runs out of gas at around ISO 640. The M9 is two full stops better in low light.

6. The M9 cost $6995 (body only) and the X100 costs $1200 including lens.

7. The X100 uses a CMOS sensor and the M9 a CCD sensor.

8. The X100 shoots video, the M9 does not.

9. The X100 has an 11MP sensor. The M9 has an 18+MP sensor.

10. While this is strictly opinion, color rendition, handling and resolution on the X100 is really inferior to that of the M9.

Both cameras are merely tools. The M9 in the hands of a rank amateur will make substandard images compared to the results an experienced pro could get out of the X100. This isn’t about that. It’s about comparing apples and oranges. Please note I am not saying the Fuji X100 is a bad camera. I think it’s a good camera. It has some issues, but it’s a good idea and lots of fun. I am also not saying which camera is “better” because that is also nonsense. What I am saying is that it is crazy to equate the X100 to a Leica M9. One more thing to note; I actually own both cameras.

Thanks for listening – and end of rant.

_________
This Post Sponsored by Animoto