Jump to content

Handled M9 today...reinforced decision to stick with M8.2


Jeff S

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I've posted elsewhere on my reasons to retain my M8.2, even though I could afford to replace or add an M9. But, until today, I hadn't actually handled the new guy.

 

I can certainly understand why many will prefer the new camera. For me, however, the following key points apply:

 

1. I love the 28 cron asph and 50 lux asph on the M8.2...for FOV and IQ. Although the M8.2 and M9 both have 28 frame lines, I can't see the ones on the M9, with my glasses, nearly as well. So, I'd end up using the 35 cron more, and it's a fine lens, but not the 28. The 50 lux works well on either camera, but for an equivalent FOV, I'd probably end up using my 75 cron more on the M9, but I've never liked the 75 framelines, and the 50 lux is my fave.

 

2. Related to above, I don't foresee going wider than my 28...otherwise, the FF M9 would have more appeal. But, I don't like external finders, so even an M9 would come with some limitations for me on the wide end.

 

3. I like the top display and the sapphire screen of the M8.2.

 

4. I prefer the 2m VF distance on the M8.2, despite my using film Ms with 1m VF.

 

5 .I do 75% bw and 25% color, and generally print 8x10...or maybe 11x14 on occcasion. (You can tell I'm an old film guy...still not used to these A3, A4 sizes.) The files from the M8.2 are already beautiful. Over time, with enough user reviews, I'll better determine if I'm missing something.

 

6. An extra stop or so for equivalent noise is certainly a benefit, but not compelling for me. Again, user experiences will help to identify real differences.

 

7. Despite reports elsewhere, my M8.2 shutter/motor sound was slightly quieter than the M9 in the store. The difference was subtle, but I was hoping for an even quieter shutter. In fact, I'm one of the minority who would like a manual shutter cocking and a sound equal to my M7s.

 

8. I don't mind IR filters at all. I bought them, put them on, and that's that. Based on Sean's preliminary review of the M9, it doesn't seem to portray some blacks as well as with a filter. And, I no longer own other Ms, which would require me to put on and take off filters.

 

At the end of the day, I'm thrilled Leica came up with the M9 and other new products, and I hope they're wildly successful and profitable. For me, if I were just entering the M digital world...knowing what I know now, and cost aside...I'd buy the M8.2. And since I have one already, I think maybe I'll pick up another as a back-up...for cheap, says my dealer:)

 

Jeff

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I've posted elsewhere on my reasons to retain my M8.2, even though I could afford to replace or add an M9. But, until today, I hadn't actually handled the new guy.

 

I can certainly understand why many will prefer the new camera. For me, however, the following key points apply:

 

1. I love the 28 cron asph and 50 lux asph on the M8.2...for FOV and IQ. Although the M8.2 and M9 both have 28 frame lines, I can't see the ones on the M9, with my glasses, nearly as well. So, I'd end up using the 35 cron more, and it's a fine lens, but not the 28. The 50 lux works well on either camera, but for an equivalent FOV, I'd probably end up using my 75 cron more on the M9, but I've never liked the 75 framelines, and the 50 lux is my fave.

 

2. Related to above, I don't foresee going wider than my 28...otherwise, the FF M9 would have more appeal. But, I don't like external finders, so even an M9 would come with some limitations for me on the wide end.

 

3. I like the top display and the sapphire screen of the M8.2.

 

4. I prefer the 2m VF distance on the M8.2, despite my using film Ms with 1m VF.

 

5 .I do 75% bw and 25% color, and generally print 8x10...or maybe 11x14 on occcasion. (You can tell I'm an old film guy...still not used to these A3, A4 sizes.) The files from the M8.2 are already beautiful. Over time, with enough user reviews, I'll better determine if I'm missing something.

 

6. An extra stop or so for equivalent noise is certainly a benefit, but not compelling for me. Again, user experiences will help to identify real differences.

 

7. Despite reports elsewhere, my M8.2 shutter/motor sound was slightly quieter than the M9 in the store. The difference was subtle, but I was hoping for an even quieter shutter. In fact, I'm one of the minority who would like a manual shutter cocking and a sound equal to my M7s.

 

8. I don't mind IR filters at all. I bought them, put them on, and that's that. Based on Sean's preliminary review of the M9, it doesn't seem to portray some blacks as well as with a filter. And, I no longer own other Ms, which would require me to put on and take off filters.

 

At the end of the day, I'm thrilled Leica came up with the M9 and other new products, and I hope they're wildly successful and profitable. For me, if I were just entering the M digital world...knowing what I know now, and cost aside...I'd buy the M8.2. And since I have one already, I think maybe I'll pick up another as a back-up...for cheap, says my dealer:)

 

Jeff

 

Good for you, the M8.2 is a great camera.

Wise decision.

 

Hans

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I can only agree with all the points you have raised - the difference in the quality of image (suuposedly) between the M9 and the M8.2 will not be huge for the size of image I am after and the loss of the easy to see top screen with image count and battery status to me is a mistake and makes it inconvenient to have to keep checking the LCD.

 

I find the omission of the top screen and the Saphire crystal LCD cost savings that are visible, and this makes me question what others may be on the M9 that are not visible?

 

Don't get me wrong, the thought of a full frame M is great but after reading Sean Reids initial part 1 review they are not significant enough to drive me to change.

 

I suspect the next incarnation - M9.2 may have solved these areas and resolved the still evident albeit less of a problem with IR and hopefully produced some weather sealing and a better LCD - only time will tell.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've posted elsewhere on my reasons to retain my M8.2, even though I could afford to replace or add an M9. But, until today, I hadn't actually handled the new guy.

 

I can certainly understand why many will prefer the new camera. For me, however, the following key points apply:

 

1. I love the 28 cron asph and 50 lux asph on the M8.2...for FOV and IQ. Although the M8.2 and M9 both have 28 frame lines, I can't see the ones on the M9, with my glasses, nearly as well. So, I'd end up using the 35 cron more, and it's a fine lens, but not the 28. The 50 lux works well on either camera, but for an equivalent FOV, I'd probably end up using my 75 cron more on the M9, but I've never liked the 75 framelines, and the 50 lux is my fave.

 

2. Related to above, I don't foresee going wider than my 28...otherwise, the FF M9 would have more appeal. But, I don't like external finders, so even an M9 would come with some limitations for me on the wide end.

 

3. I like the top display and the sapphire screen of the M8.2.

 

4. I prefer the 2m VF distance on the M8.2, despite my using film Ms with 1m VF.

 

5 .I do 75% bw and 25% color, and generally print 8x10...or maybe 11x14 on occcasion. (You can tell I'm an old film guy...still not used to these A3, A4 sizes.) The files from the M8.2 are already beautiful. Over time, with enough user reviews, I'll better determine if I'm missing something.

 

6. An extra stop or so for equivalent noise is certainly a benefit, but not compelling for me. Again, user experiences will help to identify real differences.

 

7. Despite reports elsewhere, my M8.2 shutter/motor sound was slightly quieter than the M9 in the store. The difference was subtle, but I was hoping for an even quieter shutter. In fact, I'm one of the minority who would like a manual shutter cocking and a sound equal to my M7s.

 

8. I don't mind IR filters at all. I bought them, put them on, and that's that. Based on Sean's preliminary review of the M9, it doesn't seem to portray some blacks as well as with a filter. And, I no longer own other Ms, which would require me to put on and take off filters.

 

At the end of the day, I'm thrilled Leica came up with the M9 and other new products, and I hope they're wildly successful and profitable. For me, if I were just entering the M digital world...knowing what I know now, and cost aside...I'd buy the M8.2. And since I have one already, I think maybe I'll pick up another as a back-up...for cheap, says my dealer:)

 

Jeff

Jeff, I really think with the above reasons, you should move to M9...

Now, if you had told us that you don't have the cash, or that in the end you do need that LCD meter or that you prefer sapphire glass over polycarbonate, or in the end that you want to handle 10mb RAW files rather than 18, then all these are valid reasons to stay with 8.2...

Don't forget that an M9 can get cropped and become an M8 but not the opposite ;) So basically inside every M9 there is a M8

Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't forget that an M9 can get cropped and become an M8 but not the opposite ;) So basically inside every M9 there is a M8

Inside every 20 euro bill there is a 10 euro bill :)

The price crop factor is stronger than 1.3, so upgrading is a personal decision.

Link to post
Share on other sites

As someone running to get the first M9 he can:

 

1. The M9's 75 lines are much better than the M8's in accuracy, and the M8.2s in size and visibility (more lines) - but I won't argue the fact that the 28 cron "cropped" is more impressive than the 35 'cron (uncropped). And I like the "70/75 FoV" on either camera.

 

2. Extremely key decision point - I live for the 21 focal length. Otherwise, I wouldn't be switching.

 

3. Fair enough

 

4. Also fair - although as I said, I found the 75 lines on the M9 to do really well. A good thing, because I think the 75 Summilux is going to to be a killer-app lens on the M9.

 

5 .Yep - IQ alone would not have made me change, except to the extent that a 21 f/2.8 allows for a 2-stops-lower ISO and thus less noise than the fine-but-slow C/V 15

 

6. I used to be a Velvia/Pan F shooter in my scanned-film days - but getting more and more interested in doing real low-light stuff again.

 

7. Quite possible - other have noted variations in the shutter sound. I really love the "soft release" on the M9 though - moves the firing point to what would normally be the exposure-lock point. But then I'm moving from plain vanilla M8's

 

8. Here I'd say I won't miss the filters one bit. If I wind up with both an M9 and an M8, I will leave the filters off and let the M8 do its worst. I've seen performers stare at me from the stage when they wondered what this strange pink spot reflecting the stage lights was. I've had kids playing nearby see a reflected pink spot from the sun off my filter and think they were being targeted with a laser. For free they were OK, but now my 60mm for the 21 has some scratches and is starting to add a lot of flare - and is $250 to replace. I'm putting that $250 towards the M9.

 

Realistically, if you don't need wider than 28, the M8s are fine. And I expect now that some improvements are "visible" in the M9 firmware, some of them will get ported to the M8 in a firmware upgrade if the hardware is compatible (Finer ISO gradations, lens table for manual coding).

 

Plus - think of all the cheap user M8s us M9 users will put on the market for you!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Jeff, I really think with the above reasons, you should move to M9...

Now, if you had told us that you don't have the cash, or that in the end you do need that LCD meter or that you prefer sapphire glass over polycarbonate, or in the end that you want to handle 10mb RAW files rather than 18, then all these are valid reasons to stay with 8.2...

Don't forget that an M9 can get cropped and become an M8 but not the opposite ;) So basically inside every M9 there is a M8

 

So, I should spend the money because I can? One reason I have the money is because I use better logic in my spending decisions.

 

When I said that I like the top display and sapphire glass, let me clarify that this means I greatly prefer these features.

 

!8 vs 10 files aren't the issue...the quality of the resulting prints, at my print size, is the issue. Again, I tend to prefer my own logic rather than someone else's...like a marketing department's. But, like I said, if the prints can be improved (I can test this myself with a dealer demo), my thoughts could change.

 

Finally, you over-generalize about there being an M8 inside every M9. My first point regarding 28 framelines, for instance, doesn't apply...and that's important to me.

 

But, hey, none of this is cast in stone...just my initial impressions. And, I'm sure the products will evolve, as will my thinking.

 

Jeff

Link to post
Share on other sites

1. The M9's 75 lines are much better than the M8's in accuracy, and the M8.2s in size and visibility (more lines) - but I won't argue the fact that the 28 cron "cropped" is more impressive than the 35 'cron (uncropped). And I like the "70/75 FoV" on either camera.

 

Thanks, Andy, for your thoughts on all my points. I understand, given your own style and needs, why the M9 is a better decision for you.

 

On the issue of 75 framelines, per your quote, let me further explain my concerns. I own a 75 cron asph, and it's a great lens, but I still don't enjoy seeing and framing a subject with just some "corners on a box" for framelines. The outer 50mm lines work fantastically well for me. The inner corners just don't allow me to picture the image as well. This is my own deficiency, I'm sure, but part of the joy of an M for me is the ability to clearly see and judge inside and outside the frame.

 

So, while the M9 lines are bigger (and I could use a magnifier to make them greater still), and possibly more accurate (although the 2m VF of the M8.2 would counter that argument), that won't change my basic issue with the short 75 corner lines. Maybe there's a technical limitation, but I always wished that the corners on the 75 lines were extended to provide more of a box with clearer borders to see through.

 

Jeff

Link to post
Share on other sites

Wise decision. I would love the ability to crop using the the M9, and still have plenty of image left for a decent A3 print, but I will wait until it hits the used market. I simply refuse to go along anymore with Leicas pricing schemes. Enough is enough. I'm very happy with my M8.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I also shot side-by-side comparisons with my M8 and an M9 today - and I'm really pleased I did because it's at least going to postpone the almost irresistible itch to have the 'latest-greatest'. I honestly can't see the claimed improvements in anything other than the full-frame issue. In every other respect, I prefer the images I took with my M8.

Because my methodology was totally unscientific, and there would be a lot of mud-slinging if I wrote about what I think I see in the comparisons, I suggest people do the same for themselves and actually rigorously test side-by-side before gushing superlatives over the new camera and disparaging the old.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I also shot side-by-side comparisons with my M8 and an M9 today - and I'm really pleased I did because it's at least going to postpone the almost irresistible itch to have the 'latest-greatest'. I honestly can't see the claimed improvements in anything other than the full-frame issue. In every other respect, I prefer the images I took with my M8.

Because my methodology was totally unscientific, and there would be a lot of mud-slinging if I wrote about what I think I see in the comparisons, I suggest people do the same for themselves and actually rigorously test side-by-side before gushing superlatives over the new camera and disparaging the old.

I remember going to a shop to try the M8 when I owned the R-D1. I was not convinced and wrote about how I though the R-D1 was a better camera. Somehow I bought an M8 and after a year with it, I can clearly say it is a much superior camera. So when the M9 specs were released and I got to try it, I ordered mine because despite it might seem close to the M8 in many respects, I expect all the little improvements + full frame to make it a much superior camera to the M8 after a few weeks of shooting to get used to it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Love this thread! Thanks to all of you for helping me stay centered on my M8.1 !!!

 

I resolved to avoid the bookmark for this forum and reading about the M9 because ignorance would be bliss. I really love the M8, with 28 cron glued to it. I guess I erred a little and hit the bookmark tab. It was nice to find others who appreciate the 8 8.2

 

dM8f

Link to post
Share on other sites

Good points. One thing I'll add is that I've been pleased with ultra wides and the M8. For the 15/4.5 CV, I use an external finder, would still need to on the M9. For 21mm, I just use the whole VF area of the M8. Curious to know how the M9's entire VF matches a 21mm lens, or if VF is absolutely required.

 

I don't wear glasses when shooting, but have a diopter in my M8.

 

As someone running to get the first M9 he can:

 

1. The M9's 75 lines are much better than the M8's in accuracy, and the M8.2s in size and visibility (more lines) - but I won't argue the fact that the 28 cron "cropped" is more impressive than the 35 'cron (uncropped). And I like the "70/75 FoV" on either camera.

 

2. Extremely key decision point - I live for the 21 focal length. Otherwise, I wouldn't be switching.

 

3. Fair enough

 

4. Also fair - although as I said, I found the 75 lines on the M9 to do really well. A good thing, because I think the 75 Summilux is going to to be a killer-app lens on the M9.

 

5 .Yep - IQ alone would not have made me change, except to the extent that a 21 f/2.8 allows for a 2-stops-lower ISO and thus less noise than the fine-but-slow C/V 15

 

6. I used to be a Velvia/Pan F shooter in my scanned-film days - but getting more and more interested in doing real low-light stuff again.

 

7. Quite possible - other have noted variations in the shutter sound. I really love the "soft release" on the M9 though - moves the firing point to what would normally be the exposure-lock point. But then I'm moving from plain vanilla M8's

 

8. Here I'd say I won't miss the filters one bit. If I wind up with both an M9 and an M8, I will leave the filters off and let the M8 do its worst. I've seen performers stare at me from the stage when they wondered what this strange pink spot reflecting the stage lights was. I've had kids playing nearby see a reflected pink spot from the sun off my filter and think they were being targeted with a laser. For free they were OK, but now my 60mm for the 21 has some scratches and is starting to add a lot of flare - and is $250 to replace. I'm putting that $250 towards the M9.

 

Realistically, if you don't need wider than 28, the M8s are fine. And I expect now that some improvements are "visible" in the M9 firmware, some of them will get ported to the M8 in a firmware upgrade if the hardware is compatible (Finer ISO gradations, lens table for manual coding).

 

Plus - think of all the cheap user M8s us M9 users will put on the market for you!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I remember going to a shop to try the M8 when I owned the R-D1. I was not convinced and wrote about how I though the R-D1 was a better camera. Somehow I bought an M8 and after a year with it, I can clearly say it is a much superior camera. So when the M9 specs were released and I got to try it, I ordered mine because despite it might seem close to the M8 in many respects, I expect all the little improvements + full frame to make it a much superior camera to the M8 after a few weeks of shooting to get used to it.

 

I agree with you to a certain extent: I also preferred the files from my RD1s at first (they have a very special look), but after six months with the M8 I've got to know it quite well, and my outdoor test shots were simply neutral street-scapes in high contrast light - nothing more.

 

My first post began as a detailed analysis of the images, but then I realized that this would just lead to nitpicking about methodology and exposure and firmware and processing, so I deleted all of it and just advise people to try the camera themselves.

 

As I've always said, I'd also like a full-frame camera for my Leica lenses. If you believe the hype that's going-on right now about the M9 then you're going to expect a quantum leap in IQ improvement alongside the larger field of view (amazingly people are seeing the quality of the 14bit workflow in tiny compressed online jpegs!) However, I personally don't see that the sensor has that potential for massive improvement - to me the central sections of the images look virtually identical, but the M8 images are very, very slightly sharper, and they seem to have more 'dimension' (the M9 images look ever so slightly more 'digital' - somehow flat or processed - to me - this is hard to define, and everyone should test for themselves, as I've said).

 

I'm going to wait and see what happens with the M9 once the hype has settled down. See if I can borrow one for a weekend or so. It's a lot of money for a camera to carry around on holiday, and I definitely won't be buying one on the basis of a jpeg of someone's daughter posted on the net.

 

Anyway, I visit your blog often and love your images and look forward to seeing what you do with the M9. I think your photography will continue being interesting and enchanting with the M9 just as it was with the M8. I doubt I'll notice you're using a "much superior" camera though - but if you believe it to be, then you'll enjoy using it more than the M8 - and that's the important thing.

Link to post
Share on other sites

As I've always said, I'd also like a full-frame camera for my Leica lenses. If you believe the hype that's going-on right now about the M9 then you're going to expect a quantum leap in IQ improvement alongside the larger field of view (amazingly people are seeing the quality of the 14bit workflow in tiny compressed online jpegs!) However, I personally don't see that the sensor has that potential for massive improvement - to me the central sections of the images look virtually identical, but the M8 images are very, very slightly sharper, and they seem to have more 'dimension' (the M9 images look ever so slightly more 'digital' - somehow flat or processed - to me - this is hard to define, and everyone should test for themselves, as I've said).

You analysis is similar to mine on very few samples. A M8 with 24mm Elmarit produces sharpness that is hard to improve to see a difference on A3 prints. So I don't mind if the M9 stays at that level. The plasticy look kicks in, but above 640 which I don't use that often, so no real problem. As for 14 bit, I am no technical guy on how that influences pictures, but I did see more tonal range in skin tones and skies.

So in the end, what convinced me was when I looked at the picture I posted on my blog. The 35mm Lux Asp on full frame sensor widens my creativity capability as I can know have much thinner DOF at 35mm. With the 24mm Elmarit at F2.8, it was very difficult. I really feel that 35mm Lux Asph + M9 could be an amazing combo for years to come.

 

Anyway, I visit your blog often and love your images and look forward to seeing what you do with the M9. I think your photography will continue being interesting and enchanting with the M9 just as it was with the M8. I doubt I'll notice you're using a "much superior" camera though - but if you believe it to be, then you'll enjoy using it more than the M8 - and that's the important thing.

thanks. I expect one big improvement from the M9 above all and it is kind of stupid : the exposure compensation wheel ... Right now to compensate, I aim somewhere where light is what I want, than recompose. Many shots are lost in that slow process so ability to just turn the wheel to compensate on the fly will be great.

 

One could say €5500 is a lot of money for full frame + a few improvement, and it is, but, I bought my M8 used for €2500, warranty has run off and its shutter fails when it is cold (winter almost here) :confused:. Getting the M9, doesnt seem a too bad option given how often I use it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I expect one big improvement from the M9 above all and it is kind of stupid : the exposure compensation wheel ... Right now to compensate, I aim somewhere where light is what I want, than recompose. Many shots are lost in that slow process so ability to just turn the wheel to compensate on the fly will be great.

 

My M8.2 has this feature as well. But, out of curiosity, why not just shoot manually and use the arrows?

Jeff

Link to post
Share on other sites

My M8.2 has this feature as well. But, out of curiosity, why not just shoot manually and use the arrows?

Jeff

Not fast enough. I shoot a lot on Les Champs-Elysées. Trees, high contrasts, shops light, sun ... auto ISO is so much easier.

The M8.2 does not have the wheel only optionm you have to half press the shutter too I believe.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 5 years later...
I've posted elsewhere on my reasons to retain my M8.2, even though I could afford to replace or add an M9. But, until today, I hadn't actually handled the new guy.

 

I can certainly understand why many will prefer the new camera. For me, however, the following key points apply:

 

1. I love the 28 cron asph and 50 lux asph on the M8.2...for FOV and IQ. Although the M8.2 and M9 both have 28 frame lines, I can't see the ones on the M9, with my glasses, nearly as well. So, I'd end up using the 35 cron more, and it's a fine lens, but not the 28. The 50 lux works well on either camera, but for an equivalent FOV, I'd probably end up using my 75 cron more on the M9, but I've never liked the 75 framelines, and the 50 lux is my fave...........

 

Jeff

 

Wouldn't the crop lines on the M8 of a 28mm lens be almost in the same place as an M9 with a 35mm?

 

So instead of using a 28mm lens on the M8 to achieve your desired FOV you could use the 35mm on the M9.

 

No?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Ineresting topic and interesting replies.

 

I especially liked Adan's carefully reasoned, fully comprehended and entirely justified responses in post #6.

I know which body worked better for me but I can also see the other side of the coin.

For me one was the obvious route but, clearly, both views are equally 'correct'; there IS no unilaterally applicable answer here.

 

Carry On!

 

Philip.

Edited by pippy
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...