Fujifilm X-Pro1 versus Leica M9
The Fujifilm X-Pro1 and the Leica M9 are two enthusiast cameras that were officially introduced, respectively, in January 2012 and September 2009. The X-Pro1 is a mirrorless interchangeable lens camera, while the M9 is a rangefinder-style mirrorless. The cameras are based on an APS-C (X-Pro1) and a full frame sensor. The Fujifilm has a resolution of 16 megapixel, whereas the Leica provides 18.1 MP.
An illustration of the physical size and weight of the Fujifilm X-Pro1 and the Leica M9 is provided in the side-by-side display below. Three consecutive perspectives from the front, the top, and the back are presented. All width, height and depth dimensions are rounded to the nearest millimeter. You can also use the toggle button to switch to a percentage comparison if you prefer that the measures are being expressed in relative terms (in this case, the camera on the left side – the X-Pro1 – represents the basis for the calculations across all the size and weight measures).
If the front view area (width x height) of the cameras is taken as an aggregate measure of their size, the Leica M9 is somewhat smaller (3 percent) than the Fujifilm X-Pro1. However, the M9 is markedly heavier (30 percent) than the X-Pro1. In this context, it is worth noting that neither the X-Pro1 nor the M9 are weather-sealed.
The above size and weight comparisons are to some extent incomplete since they do not consider the interchangeable lenses that both of these cameras require. A larger imaging sensor will tend to go along with bigger and heavier lenses, although exceptions exist. You can find an overview of optics for the two cameras in the Fujinon X Lens Catalog (X-Pro1) and the Leica M Lens Catalog (M9).
The table below summarizes the key physical specs of the two cameras alongside a broader set of comparators. If you want to switch the focus of the display and review another camera pair, just select a new right or left comparator from among the camera models in the table. Alternatively, you can also move across to the CAM-parator tool and choose from the broad selection of possible comparisons there.
|Camera Body Specifications
|Fujifilm X-Pro1 (⇒ rgt)||140 mm||82 mm||43 mm||450 g||300||no||2012||1,699||discont.||check|
|Leica M9 (⇒ lft)||139 mm||80 mm||37 mm||585 g||..||no||2009||7,999||discont.||check|
|Fujifilm X-E2S (⇒ lft | rgt)||129 mm||75 mm||37 mm||350 g||350||no||2016||699||discont.||check|
|Fujifilm X-Pro2 (⇒ lft | rgt)||141 mm||83 mm||46 mm||495 g||350||YES||2016||1,699||latest||check|
|Fujifilm X-T10 (⇒ lft | rgt)||118 mm||83 mm||41 mm||381 g||350||no||2015||799||discont.||check|
|Fujifilm X-A2 (⇒ lft | rgt)||117 mm||67 mm||40 mm||350 g||410||no||2015||399||discont.||check|
|Fujifilm X-T1 (⇒ lft | rgt)||129 mm||90 mm||47 mm||440 g||350||YES||2014||1,699||discont.||check|
|Fujifilm X100S (⇒ lft | rgt)||127 mm||74 mm||54 mm||445 g||330||no||2013||1,299||discont.||check|
|Fujifilm X-E2 (⇒ lft | rgt)||129 mm||75 mm||37 mm||350 g||350||no||2013||999||discont.||check|
|Fujifilm X-M1 (⇒ lft | rgt)||117 mm||67 mm||39 mm||330 g||350||no||2013||699||latest||check|
|Fujifilm X-A1 (⇒ lft | rgt)||117 mm||67 mm||39 mm||330 g||350||no||2013||399||discont.||check|
|Fujifilm X-E1 (⇒ lft | rgt)||129 mm||75 mm||38 mm||350 g||350||no||2012||999||discont.||check|
|Leica M10 (⇒ lft | rgt)||139 mm||80 mm||39 mm||660 g||210||no||2017||6,595||latest||check|
|Leica M Typ 240 (⇒ lft | rgt)||139 mm||80 mm||42 mm||680 g||..||YES||2012||6,950||discont.||check|
|Leica M8 (⇒ lft | rgt)||139 mm||80 mm||37 mm||591 g||..||no||2006||5,499||discont.||check|
|Panasonic GH2 (⇒ lft | rgt)||124 mm||90 mm||76 mm||442 g||330||no||2010||1,499||discont.||check|
|Sony RX100 IV (⇒ lft | rgt)||102 mm||58 mm||41 mm||298 g||280||no||2015||999||discont.||check|
The listed prices provide an indication of the market segment that the manufacturer of the cameras have been targeting. The X-Pro1 was launched at a markedly lower price (by 79 percent) than the M9, which puts it into a different market segment. Usually, retail prices stay at first close to the launch price, but after several months, discounts become available. Later in the product cycle and, in particular, when the replacement model is about to appear, further discounting and stock clearance sales often push the camera price considerably down. Then, after the new model is out, very good deals can frequently be found on the pre-owned market.
The imaging sensor is at the core of digital cameras and its size is one of the main determining factors of image quality. A large sensor will generally have larger individual pixels that offer better low-light sensitivity, provide wider dynamic range, and have richer color depth than smaller pixels in a sensor of the same technological generation. Furthermore, a large sensor camera will give the photographer more possibilities to use shallow depth-of-field in order to isolate a subject from the background. On the downside, larger sensors tend to be associated with larger, more expensive camera bodies and lenses.
Of the two cameras under consideration, the Fujifilm X-Pro1 features an APS-C sensor and the Leica M9 a full frame sensor. The sensor area in the M9 is 135 percent bigger. As a result of these sensor size differences, the cameras have a format factor of, respectively, 1.5 and 1.0. Both cameras have a native aspect ratio (sensor width to sensor height) of 3:2.
With 18.1MP, the M9 offers a higher resolution than the X-Pro1 (16MP), but the M9 nevertheless has larger individual pixels (pixel pitch of 6.91μm versus 4.80μm for the X-Pro1) due to its larger sensor. However, the X-Pro1 is a much more recent model (by 2 years and 4 months) than the M9, and its sensor will have benefitted from technological advances during this time that enhance the light gathering capacity of its pixel-units. Coming back to sensor resolution, it should be mentioned that neither of the two cameras has an anti-alias filter installed, so they are able to capture all the detail the sensor resolves.
For most cameras, data on sensor performance has been reported by DXO Mark. This service is based on lab testing and assigns an overall score to each camera sensor, as well as ratings for dynamic range ("DXO Landscape"), color depth ("DXO Portrait"), and low-light sensitivity ("DXO Sports"). The table below summarizes the physical sensor characteristics and sensor quality findings and compares them across a set of similar cameras.
|Fujifilm X-Pro1 (⇒ rgt)||APS-C||16.0||4896||3264||1080/24p||-||-||-||-|
|Leica M9 (⇒ lft)||Full Frame||18.1||5212||3472||no||22.5||11.7||884||69|
|Fujifilm X-E2S (⇒ lft | rgt)||APS-C||16.0||4896||3264||1080/60p||-||-||-||-|
|Fujifilm X-Pro2 (⇒ lft | rgt)||APS-C||24.0||6000||4000||1080/60p||-||-||-||-|
|Fujifilm X-T10 (⇒ lft | rgt)||APS-C||16.0||4896||3264||1080/60p||-||-||-||-|
|Fujifilm X-A2 (⇒ lft | rgt)||APS-C||16.0||4896||3264||1080/30p||-||-||-||-|
|Fujifilm X-T1 (⇒ lft | rgt)||APS-C||16.0||4896||3264||1080/60p||-||-||-||-|
|Fujifilm X100S (⇒ lft | rgt)||APS-C||16.0||4896||3264||1080/60p||-||-||-||-|
|Fujifilm X-E2 (⇒ lft | rgt)||APS-C||16.0||4896||3264||1080/60p||-||-||-||-|
|Fujifilm X-M1 (⇒ lft | rgt)||APS-C||16.0||4896||3264||1080/30p||-||-||-||-|
|Fujifilm X-A1 (⇒ lft | rgt)||APS-C||16.0||4896||3264||1080/30p||-||-||-||-|
|Fujifilm X-E1 (⇒ lft | rgt)||APS-C||16.0||4896||3264||1080/24p||-||-||-||-|
|Leica M10 (⇒ lft | rgt)||Full Frame||23.8||5952||3992||no||..||..||..||..|
|Leica M Typ 240 (⇒ lft | rgt)||Full Frame||23.7||5952||3976||1080/25p||24.0||13.3||1860||84|
|Leica M8 (⇒ lft | rgt)||APS-H||10.4||3936||2630||no||21.1||11.3||663||59|
|Panasonic GH2 (⇒ lft | rgt)||Four Thirds||15.9||4608||3456||1080/60i||21.2||11.3||655||60|
|Sony RX100 IV (⇒ lft | rgt)||1-inch||20.0||5472||3648||4K/30p||22.8||12.6||591||70|
Many modern cameras are not only capable of taking still images, but can also record movies. The X-Pro1 indeed provides movie recording capabilities, while the M9 does not. The highest resolution format that the X-Pro1 can use is 1080/24p.
Beyond body and sensor, cameras can and do differ across a range of features. For example, the X-Pro1 has an electronic viewfinder (1440k dots), while the M9 has an optical one. Both systems have their advantages, with the electronic viewfinder making it possible to project supplementary shooting information into the framing view, whereas the optical viewfinder offers lag-free viewing and a very clear framing image. The table below summarizes some of the other core capabilities of the Fujifilm X-Pro1 and Leica M9 in connection with corresponding information for a sample of similar cameras. The full specs-sheets can be found in the camera manual or, for example, in the dpreview camera hub.
|Fujifilm X-Pro1 (⇒ rgt)||1440||no||3.0||1230||fixed||no||4000||6.0||no||no|
|Leica M9 (⇒ lft)||optical||no||2.5||230||fixed||no||4000||2.0||no||no|
|Fujifilm X-E2S (⇒ lft | rgt)||2360||no||3.0||1040||fixed||no||4000||7.0||7||no|
|Fujifilm X-Pro2 (⇒ lft | rgt)||2360||no||3.0||1620||fixed||no||8000||8.0||no||no|
|Fujifilm X-T10 (⇒ lft | rgt)||2360||no||3.0||920||tilting||no||4000||8.0||5||no|
|Fujifilm X-A2 (⇒ lft | rgt)||no||no||3.0||920||tilting||no||4000||5.6||7||no|
|Fujifilm X-T1 (⇒ lft | rgt)||2360||no||3.0||1040||tilting||no||4000||8.0||no||no|
|Fujifilm X100S (⇒ lft | rgt)||2360||no||2.8||460||fixed||no||4000||6.0||9||no|
|Fujifilm X-E2 (⇒ lft | rgt)||2360||no||3.0||1040||fixed||no||4000||7.0||7||no|
|Fujifilm X-M1 (⇒ lft | rgt)||no||no||3.0||920||tilting||no||4000||5.6||7||no|
|Fujifilm X-A1 (⇒ lft | rgt)||no||no||3.0||920||tilting||no||4000||5.6||7||no|
|Fujifilm X-E1 (⇒ lft | rgt)||2360||no||2.8||460||fixed||no||4000||6.0||YES||no|
|Leica M10 (⇒ lft | rgt)||optical||no||3.0||1037||fixed||no||4000||5.0||no||no|
|Leica M Typ 240 (⇒ lft | rgt)||optical||no||3.0||920||fixed||no||4000||3.0||no||no|
|Leica M8 (⇒ lft | rgt)||optical||no||2.5||230||fixed||no||8000||2.0||no||no|
|Panasonic GH2 (⇒ lft | rgt)||1534||no||3.0||460||swivel||no||4000||3.0||15.6||no|
|Sony RX100 IV (⇒ lft | rgt)||2359||no||3.0||1228||tilting||no||2000||16.0||10.2||no|
Both the X-Pro1 and the M9 have been discontinued, but can regularly be found used on ebay. The M9 was replaced by the Leica M Typ 240, while the X-Pro1 was followed by the Fujifilm X-Pro2.
So what is the bottom line? Which of the two cameras – the Fujifilm X-Pro1 or the Leica M9 – has the upper hand? The listing below highlights the relative strengths of the two models.
Advantages of the Fujifilm X-Pro1:
- Broader imaging potential: Can record not only still images but also 1080/24p movies.
- More framing info: Has an electronic viewfinder that displays shooting data.
- Larger screen: Has a bigger rear LCD (3.0" vs 2.5") for image review and settings control.
- More detailed LCD: Has a higher resolution rear screen (1230k vs 230k dots).
- Faster burst: Shoots at higher frequency (6 vs 2 flaps/sec) to capture the decisive moment.
- Less heavy: Is lighter (by 135g or 23 percent) and hence easier to carry around.
- More affordable: Was introduced into a lower priced category (79 percent cheaper at launch).
- More modern: Reflects 2 years and 4 months of technical progress since the M9 launch.
Reasons to prefer the Leica M9:
- More detail: Has more megapixels (18.1 vs 16MP), which boosts linear resolution by 6%.
- Better low-light imaging: Features bigger pixels on a larger sensor for better high-ISO images.
- Brighter framing: Features an optical viewfinder for clear, lag-free composition.
- More prestigious: Has the Leica luxury appeal, which ensures a high resale value.
- More heavily discounted: Has been around for much longer (launched in September 2009).
If the number of relative strengths (bullet points above) is taken as a guide, the X-Pro1 emerges as the winner of the contest (8 : 5 points). However, the pertinence of the various camera strengths will differ across photographers, so that you might want to weigh individual camera traits according to their importance for your own imaging needs.
In any case, while the comparison of technical specifications can provide a useful overview of the capabilities of different cameras, it remains incomplete and does no justice, for example, to the way the X-Pro1 or the M9 handle or perform in practice. User reviews that are available, for instance, at amazon can sometimes shed light on these issues, but such feedback is all too often partial, inconsistent, and inaccurate. This is why hands-on reviews by experts are important. The following table reports the overall rankings of the cameras as published by some of the major camera review sites. The detailed reviews can be accessed, respectively, on the websites of cameralabs.com, dpreview.com, ephotozine.com, imaging-resource.com, and photographyblog.com.
|Fujifilm X-Pro1 (⇒ rgt)||HiRec||79/100 Silver||4.5/5||4/5||4.5/5||2012||1,699||discont.||check|
|Leica M9 (⇒ lft)||-||-||4.5/5||4.5/5||-||2009||7,999||discont.||check|
|Fujifilm X-E2S (⇒ lft | rgt)||-||77/100||4.5/5||-||4.5/5||2016||699||discont.||check|
|Fujifilm X-Pro2 (⇒ lft | rgt)||Rec||83/100 Silver||4.5/5||4.5/5||4.5/5||2016||1,699||latest||check|
|Fujifilm X-T10 (⇒ lft | rgt)||HiRec||80/100 Silver||5/5||4/5||5/5||2015||799||discont.||check|
|Fujifilm X-A2 (⇒ lft | rgt)||-||-||4.5/5||4/5||4.5/5||2015||399||discont.||check|
|Fujifilm X-T1 (⇒ lft | rgt)||HiRec||84/100 Gold||5/5||4/5||5/5||2014||1,699||discont.||check|
|Fujifilm X100S (⇒ lft | rgt)||HiRec||81/100 Gold||4.5/5||4/5||5/5||2013||1,299||discont.||check|
|Fujifilm X-E2 (⇒ lft | rgt)||-||80/100 Gold||4.5/5||-||5/5||2013||999||discont.||check|
|Fujifilm X-M1 (⇒ lft | rgt)||Rec||77/100 Gold||4.5/5||-||4.5/5||2013||699||latest||check|
|Fujifilm X-A1 (⇒ lft | rgt)||-||-||4.5/5||-||4.5/5||2013||399||discont.||check|
|Fujifilm X-E1 (⇒ lft | rgt)||HiRec||79/100 Gold||4.5/5||4.5/5||4.5/5||2012||999||discont.||check|
|Leica M10 (⇒ lft | rgt)||-||-||4/5||-||4.5/5||2017||6,595||latest||check|
|Leica M Typ 240 (⇒ lft | rgt)||-||-||4/5||-||-||2012||6,950||discont.||check|
|Leica M8 (⇒ lft | rgt)||-||HiRec||-||-||-||2006||5,499||discont.||check|
|Panasonic GH2 (⇒ lft | rgt)||86/100 HiRec||79/100 Silver||4.5/5||4.5/5||5/5||2010||1,499||discont.||check|
|Sony RX100 IV (⇒ lft | rgt)||HiRec||85/100 Gold||4/5||4.5/5||4.5/5||2015||999||discont.||check|
Care should be taken when interpreting the review scores above, though. The ratings are only valid when refering to cameras in the same category and of the same age. Hence, a score should always be seen in the context of the camera's market launch date and its price, and rating-comparisons among cameras that span long time periods or concern very differently equipped models make little sense. Also, please note that some of the review sites have changed their methodology and reporting over time.
In case you would like to check on the differences and similarities of other camera models, just make a corresponding selection in the search boxes below. There is also a set of direct links to comparison reviews that other users of the CAM-parator app explored. If you do not see the camera that you are looking for, please send me an email, and I will try to add information on that model to the database.
- Canon 5D Mark IV vs Canon M6
- Canon SL1 vs Canon G9 X Mark II
- Fujifilm GFX 50S vs Canon 5DS
- Nikon D500 vs Nikon D850
- Panasonic GH3 vs Nikon D5600
- Panasonic L1 vs Olympus E-510
- Panasonic TZ100 vs Canon G5 X
- Pentax K-3 vs Olympus E-5
- Sony A6000 vs Sony RX100 IV
- Sony A7R III vs Sony RX100 III
- Sony RX1R vs Fujifilm X100F
- Sony RX1R vs Sony RX100