Leica M9 vs Fujifilm X-E1

Leica M9
Fujifilm X-E1

Reasons to buy the Leica M9

Great viewfinder
Viewfinder
Rangefinder
Almost no delay when powering up
Startup delay
800 ms startup delay
Thin
Thickness
1.5"
Interchangeable lenses
Interchangeable lenses
Many lenses to choose from
 

Reasons to buy the Fujifilm X-E1

Supports 24p
24p movies
For that film look
Viewfinder coverage
Great viewfinder coverage
100%
Live view
Has live view
Preview your photos
External mic jack
External mic jack
Record higher quality audio with a microphone

galleries

Explore our gallery of 50 sample photos taken by the Fujifilm X-E1.
Explore our gallery of 50 sample photos taken by the Leica M9.

competitors

Leica M9 Competitors

Leica M10

Leica M10

Mirrorless interchangeable-lens

$6,895 body only

Screen size Much larger screen
Screen resolution Much higher resolution screen
Battery life Much shorter battery life
Fujifilm X-Pro2

Fujifilm X-Pro2

Mirrorless interchangeable-lens

$1,699 body only

$2,148 - $2,598 with 23mm lens

Screen size Much larger screen
Screen resolution Much higher resolution screen
Lens availability Fewer lenses available
Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX1

Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX1

Boutique

$2,398

Screen size Much larger screen
Screen resolution Much higher resolution screen
Viewfinder No viewfinder

Fujifilm X-E1 Competitors

Fujifilm X-T1

Fujifilm X-T1

Mirrorless interchangeable-lens

$599 - $1,299 body only

$899 - $1,699 with 18-55mm lens

Startup delay Much less startup delay
Screen size Much larger screen
Supports 24p No 24p support
Fujifilm X-M1

Fujifilm X-M1

Mirrorless interchangeable-lens

$400 body only

Startup delay Much less startup delay
Screen size Much larger screen
Viewfinder No viewfinder
Fujifilm X-T10

Fujifilm X-T10

Mirrorless interchangeable-lens

$558 body only

$899 with 18-55mm lens

Screen size Much larger screen
Light sensitivity Better maximum light sensitivity
External mic jack Lacks an external mic jack

discussion

Leica M9
M9
Leica

Report a correction
Fujifilm X-E1
X-E1
Fujifilm

Report a correction

Showing 0 comments