Next page: Sample Shots
Sadly your more likely right than not
I know it's Leica and they have a brand name to cash in on, but 1,500 for APCS camera?! Like frigging Hasselblad, £25k for a body and will it take better photos than a Nikon D3 or a Canon 1D? Well maybe but if you can't compose your shots, then no, you just get a better quality mess of a picture.
Sadly I can imagine most of these cameras will end up in some posh city camera shops being sold to people with way more money than sense and no idea how to compose a shot to save their lives.
If you go to DPReview and do a side-by-side comparison of the Fujifilm X100 with the Leica X1 (which you can do from the former's test), it's difficult to support the conclusion that the "easily delivers the best image quality in its category". At high ISO the X100 is surely a bit better and both cameras are rated highly for the lens quality (and the Fujifilm is a full stop faster).
Of course the X100 is physically a bit larger, but then it has a built-in viewfinder and something of a handgrip (both cost-extras on the Leica). With both cameras there appear to be quirks, and neither appear to be up with the best on AF, speed of use. Also both are expensive albeit the Leica hugely so.
Of course there will always be sold by the badge on a camera, and I suspect that is far and the way the most important issue when it comes to premium-priced products like the Leica. Until I see some direct side-by-side objective evidence under comparable conditions I'm inclined to think the Leica does not easily deliver the best images - if anything it's subtly the other way.
Nice camera, but..
it still looks designed to appeal to the shrill, gullible twats who buy anything with an expensive badge on it.