I very much doubt it.
However, the reason I pose this question is I have received a number of comments and emails indicating there is a Leica-like look to a few of my Fuji X-Pro 1 images with the 35/1.4 lens. Perhaps it is the shallow depth of field or perhaps the sharpness wide open or perhaps the black and white conversions. Who knows?
I have only shot with a Leica M9 a handful of times so I am ill-prepared to answer the question. I enjoyed my M9 experience: fun camera, great images and of course it is quite exhilarating walking around with over ten grand of german-made camera equipment in a half-filled camera bag.
So to answer the question one must first explain what is a Leica-like image? Let me try. It is probably the beautiful isolation produced by the full frame sensor and the super fast sharp lenses. It is that magical look when the subject matter just pops out of the screen or the print. It also helps when the subject matter is not frightened away by a clumsy DSLR. The Leica is so discrete it hardly affects the subject matter and can therefore take beautifully natural and unique images. These are prerequisites for good street photography and the Leica has excelled in this category for decades.
Why bring up street photography? Because I had an opportunity to use the Fuji X-Pro 1 and 35/1.4 lens for about two weeks in New York City - primarily for street shooting.
In the past I used my Nikon D700 which sounds like a machine gun or the Fuji x100 which sounds like a Ninja. The D700 with any of the Nikon f/1.4 primes produces superb images. However, by the time I raise the camera to press the shutter, my subject matter has turned away or raised a hand to cover the face. By the time I take the second shot, they have walked completely out of the frame. The Fuji x100 with it's 35mm equivalent f/2 lens also produces very nice images, but it just doesn't isolate the subject matter as well as a full frame DSLR or Leica.
So how did the Fuji perform in New York City?
I found the Fuji X-Pro 1 and 35/1.4 lens great for street photography. It is small, light, relatively quiet and discrete. At least discrete to my subject matter. I had several photographers, including several Leica shooters who curiously approached me to discuss the merits of the Fuji. They all walked away impressed.
The 35mm lens on the Fuji is the equivalent of a 50mm lens on a full frame sensor. Classic street photography is typically shot with a much wider lens. However, I found the 50mm focal length enjoyable and workable. It produced lovely, sharp images under all lighting conditions. It was a joy to shoot at f/1.4 under relatively dim city lights. It also gave me an opportunity to get in a bit tighter than my x100. This produced some subject isolation that some may describe as Leica-like.
But certainly, the Fuji is not qualified to be compared to the Leica. It is not full-frame, it has mediocre manual focusing ability, there is no Lightroom or Aperture raw support (as of yet) and the Fuji is considerably less costly. However, the X-Pro 1 does have an innovative X-Trans APC-S sensor (sans an AA filter), world class low light capabilities, manageable auto-focusing, the highly-regarded Fuji jpg engine that produces wonderful images straight out of camera and the Fuji is considerably less costly. Hmmm.
Rather than discuss image quality, I will post a few of my street photographs using the Fuji 35/1.4. Most are shot wide open, some are not. You should be able to tell the difference.
Finally, back to my original question - Is the Fuji X-Pro 1 and 35mm f/1.4 as good as a Leica? Again, I very much doubt it. But it is somewhat exhilarating to have just a little bit of doubt.