wparsonsgisnet Posted October 26, 2009 Share #1 Posted October 26, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) I'll have to post again later in this thread, because the pix aren't ready to compare, yet. I have images taken a week apart of the same dance that was just performed by the bride's company, using the same dancers, stage, lens (35 'lux-a), and (mostly) the same lighting. Taking account for the different magnification, I believe I can demonstrate a substantial change in the image quality. I tried to experess my excitement to the bride on Sunday, but she was so busy looking at what the dancers were, or were not, doing in each shot, that she didn't get the IQ part. Watch this space. First: My initial reactions to the M9 are vastly positive. 1. What a treat to use lenses in their normal aspect. I took pix with my 35 'lux-a and 24 'rit-a and noted that I have to shelve my Heavy2Stars metal hoods, as they vignette on the M9. The hoods work great on the M8, of course. 2. So, I hauled the Leica hoods out for these 2 lenses and what a treat they are. Today, I ordered UV filters to protect the lenses, as I don't use covers. In particular, the rubber covers that go with the 35 and 24 hoods fall off too readily. Boy is that 24 wide.... I shot some close-ups yesterday of leaves on the terrace. The background is paving stones, and the perspective with the 24 is wildly upsetting. 3. When I got the M8, the bride asked me what was so special about the camera. I answered that it was the first time that the camera got out of the way of my picture taking. In comparison, the M9 actually seems to contribute to the process. There is more detail, no surprise there. There is also more shadow detail, or as other have said, there seems to be another stop of light available. The shutter is SO much quieter, and it is really nice to be able to store the lens identity with the metadata. Mechanically, it seems tighter. In particular, the on/off switch is much firmer. And the software is sturdier than that of the M8. Since I shoot a lot of dance, I am always filling the buffer. On the M8, I often encounter the endlessly flashing red light and have to pop the battery to free up the camera. This didn't happen with the M9 at any time during a shoot of about 800 images. I hate to beat a dead horse, but I really could use a bigger buffer. Surely, others have the same wish. As said before, when shooting moving objects (read: dance), one shoots a lot of images. This is NOT the shotgun approach to photog. Each image is selected. Nevertheless -- at least with the bride's dances -- there are more images per minute than the buffer accommodates. You should see the fish that got away. With regard to the buffer, I have seen some posts here, but I take a different approach than many. Sean's review of the M9 correctly states that the buffer will hold about 8 images whether compressed dng or uncompressed. I find the same, but -- The clearing time is also of interest to me -- because I fill the damn buffer so often. The clearing time is twice as long when the image is uncompressed. The stats: 8 images to fill the buffer. 38 seconds to clear (light stops flashing) for uncompressed; about 19 sec for compressed. So the buffer must store what's on the sensor (duh, Bill!) and then the write takes twice as long for the bigger file. This is my particular problem, unfortunately. With more support for fast shooting, Leica might have built a bigger buffer. It's so discouragine to find that my 8 GB cards, that used to hold 740 images, now only hold about 500+. I'm gonna have to buy some 16 GB cards. More will follow, as I get the images ready for comparison. However, the M9 has MORE detail, better edges, more of a sense of the thing in the image, and feels just about the same as the M8. It takes a lot longer to render the image in the viewer. I haven't tried the soft shutter, only the discrete. BOY, does it seem quiet. To those who will stick with the M8. It sure is a nice camera. The change is merely evolutionary. The M9 is a little better, in a lot of ways. I'll get these images ready shortly. Regards froma happy soul, and MANY thanks to Leica for making this new instrument available. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted October 26, 2009 Posted October 26, 2009 Hi wparsonsgisnet, Take a look here User experience with my new M9. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
michali Posted October 26, 2009 Share #2 Posted October 26, 2009 Bill- congratulations on your new acquisition! I wish you many, many hours of satisfaction and creativity with your M9. I've had mine for just over 6 weeks and must say that so far it's been an extremely satisfying and positive experience. I agree about how wide the 24mm is now, even though having said that I use the WATE and 12mm C/V on the M9 as well. Regards Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jager Posted October 26, 2009 Share #3 Posted October 26, 2009 Thanks Bill. Your impressions of the M9 are good to hear - especially for those of us who have yet to receive ours (but who obviously hang on any bit of information to be gleaned about them). It's especially nice to hear of the continued affirmation of the joy in returning to "normal" focal lengths - something I am deeply looking forward to. Looking forward to the images... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mole73 Posted October 26, 2009 Share #4 Posted October 26, 2009 Thanks Bill! Your impressions on the new M9 are very interesting to read an they make me happy, that I decided to take the chance and order my own one. Greetings Robert Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wparsonsgisnet Posted October 26, 2009 Author Share #5 Posted October 26, 2009 Thanks Bill! Your impressions on the new M9 are very interesting to read an they make me happy, that I decided to take the chance and order my own one. Greetings Robert Robert, a good idea to go forward. The bride is only slightly pissed off at me. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
arnold kaufman Posted October 26, 2009 Share #6 Posted October 26, 2009 Bill Great post congrads. on your new acquisition.Like others have said I have had my M-9 for about a month and enjoy everything about this camera,most of all the full frame sensor. I have one question regarding the 500 images on a 8 GB card. I have tried to simulate this on my 8 GB card using the various compressions & can't duplicate this, What are you setting the comprssion to? Arnold PS My card is SanDisk Extreme111 30MB/s edition 8 GB Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
shtarka1 Posted October 26, 2009 Share #7 Posted October 26, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) Also very happy to hear you're enjoying the new M9! If you dont mind me asking ,where did you get yours from? Im from the south shore, Stoughton, & ordered mine from Hunt's in Melrose, a month ago & still waiting, Suppose to be in the end of Oct. Thank you & looking forward to your images! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rosuna Posted October 26, 2009 Share #8 Posted October 26, 2009 Really interesting Bill... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnbuckley Posted October 27, 2009 Share #9 Posted October 27, 2009 Bill - congratulations, and you deserve it. Your line that the M8 got out of the way of your photography but the M9 contributes to it matches my experience. Very happy you got yours. Let us know when you want to start the M9 book ;-) JB Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
haribo Posted October 27, 2009 Share #10 Posted October 27, 2009 Glad you enjoy your new toy. On a funny/ironic side note. With the M8 everybody was complaining about having to use IR filters. Now with the M9, the first thing you are going to do is ordering a bunch of UV filters. PS: To be honest I haven't decided yet whether I will buy the M9 or not. Somehow I don't really want to spent CDN $8000 on a camera with the same 'old' sensor than the M8 has, only larger. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ho_co Posted October 27, 2009 Share #11 Posted October 27, 2009 ... I hate to beat a dead horse, but I really could use a bigger buffer. ... The stats: 8 images to fill the buffer. 38 seconds to clear (light stops flashing) for uncompressed; about 19 sec for compressed.... Leica might have built a bigger buffer.... Don't I remember a kind of sheepish look on Stefan's face as he explained that, well, yes, the M9 has a bigger buffer, but, uh, well, with the bigger files it didn't seem to make much difference? Congratulations! Sounds as if the camera has found a good home. I look forward to seeing your results! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wparsonsgisnet Posted October 27, 2009 Author Share #12 Posted October 27, 2009 Bill Great post congrads. on your new acquisition.Like others have said I have had my M-9 for about a month and enjoy everything about this camera,most of all the full frame sensor. I have one question regarding the 500 images on a 8 GB card. I have tried to simulate this on my 8 GB card using the various compressions & can't duplicate this, What are you setting the comprssion to? Arnold PS My card is SanDisk Extreme111 30MB/s edition 8 GB Arnold, my error. The number is about 215 with no compression. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wparsonsgisnet Posted October 27, 2009 Author Share #13 Posted October 27, 2009 Glad you enjoy your new toy.On a funny/ironic side note. With the M8 everybody was complaining about having to use IR filters. Now with the M9, the first thing you are going to do is ordering a bunch of UV filters. It is ironic. I just don't like using lens caps. For night shots, I expect I'll take the UV filter off. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wparsonsgisnet Posted October 27, 2009 Author Share #14 Posted October 27, 2009 OK, here are 2 pairs of shots. I have tried to match them as well as possible. In each case, the M8 precedes the M9 shot. The lighting is a combo of filtered outdoor light from behind and stage lites from the viewer side. Of course, the M8 shot has been blown up by the 1.3 factor to match the similar size. I have done a white balance and attempted to move the highs toward the right (in C1-Pro 4.8.3). Obviously, these are not the finished image; I tried to make them similar for comparison. Even counting for the handicap the M8 shots face in comparison with the M9 shots, as described above, the M9 shots are more generally pleasing. There is more daylight in the M9 shots, I believe, tho it didn't seem so during the shoot. Nevertheless, this is a close as I can make them. Both were shot in the same place, with about the same lighting, with the 35 'lux-a, 1/250. The ISO for the 4 shots is 640, 1600, 1250, and 1600, in the order that they appear. That is, the M9 shots are both at a higher ISO then the companion M8 shot. Pretty cool. Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/101596-user-experience-with-my-new-m9/?do=findComment&comment=1091288'>More sharing options...
Jeff S Posted October 27, 2009 Share #15 Posted October 27, 2009 3. When I got the M8, the bride asked me what was so special about the camera. I answered that it was the first time that the camera got out of the way of my picture taking. In comparison, the M9 actually seems to contribute to the process.. Bill, sounds like you're a happy camper...congrats and continued enjoyment. I wonder if you would elaborate on your above comment. I have no idea what you mean. My M6s, M7s, and now M8.2 have each served the same purpose...each has allowed me to stretch my abilities to match the camera's capabilities. Very fine tools, all. But, the act of photographing has remained the same for me (aside from obvious film vs digital issues). And the M9 is really just a bigger brother to the M8 (meaning same but bigger sensor), so the distinctions are far less than comparing the M8 to my film Ms. And, at my print sizes (mostly A4, some A3), there would probably be little if any noticeable difference in IQ. How big do you print? For me, the M8.2 already has the quieter shutter, reliable software, etc. So, what am I missing? (I also rarely shoot high ISO...400 was just fine for 25 years; 640 or more is fantastic). I ask this in the true spirit of curiosity...not to debate. Your purchase decision seems perfect for you. I just don't understand some of your comments regarding the M8 (or M8.2) by comparison. Jeff Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrism Posted October 27, 2009 Share #16 Posted October 27, 2009 The bride is only slightly pissed off at me. Just show her the comparison shots above and tell her she deserves the best! Chris Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wparsonsgisnet Posted October 27, 2009 Author Share #17 Posted October 27, 2009 ... I ask this in the true spirit of curiosity...not to debate. Your purchase decision seems perfect for you. I just don't understand some of your comments regarding the M8 (or M8.2) by comparison. Jeff Jeff, Here is "A Short History of Time." I was very happy in my b/w darkroom: Enuf Zone VI equipment to give me reliable results. I used lots of b/w at 400, with the same lenses I use now (lotsa f1.4). And, I purchased the occasional cibachrome print when I took a wonderful color shot. Then came the Dark Ages: digital photog. I waited, and waited, .... My friends bot digicam after digicam. I still wanted to use my Leica glass. Period. I did start scanning and printing digitally. When Leica announced the Digilux 2, I bot a Canon G5 to get my feet wet, and then really learned to love the D2 when it came. It works best at iso 100. Loved the zoom. All this time Leica was saying: No Way a digital M. Can't do it. So, when the M8 came already knew how to get more light out of the corners, and so on. And here was a digi back for the Leica glass! So, what happened is, I got rid of the **endless** darkroom preparation and cleanup. Then I got control of the camera by getting a real M to go with the good glass. This is what I meant by the camera getting out of the way. When I took pix with the M8, I knew what they would look like and what I'd have to do to them. And I could make prints in the same day. M's don't do certain things -- no autofocus, no long lenses. Short of that, they are the best thing that can happen to a photographer. What the M9 has done for me is illustrated in the above photographs, and also by the quieter shutter that you already have in the M8.2. There is better definition, better edges, better light capturing ability, and uncompressed raw. I feel like the camera is giving back some of the things that the M8 allowed me to do, but didn't really help with. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wparsonsgisnet Posted October 27, 2009 Author Share #18 Posted October 27, 2009 The above shots were for comparison and I probably wouldn't print any of them. Aside from the problems with the mixed light, they are shot in the shadowy part of the stage and really are grainy. However, they are the shots that are the most comparable from the shoot. I'll post a couple that have some adequate lighting and better aesthetic quality shortly. Did I say I like this camera? Regards to all, Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff S Posted October 27, 2009 Share #19 Posted October 27, 2009 Jeff, Here is "A Short History of Time.". Thanks, Bill. Our "short histories" are not too dissimilar. I, too, did darkroom work for over 20 years, using lots of Zone VI stuff (attended Picker workshop in 1992). I used film Ms for all those years (M6s and M7s), used Canikons before that, and tried Blads, Mamiyas and Plaubel Makina (6x7), and Zone VI 4x5 and 8x10s along the way. In contrast to you, however, I decided early this year (after a move back to the East Coast) to not to build my 5th darkroom, and instead go "cold turkey" by selling all my darkroom and camera gear to take the full plunge to digital. And, unlike you, I feel like I've never missed a beat using the M8.2. The post-processing compared to the darkroom is an added joy. Surprisingly, the crop factor has had hardly any impact on my shooting style. I still have the same array of lens focal lengths (28, 35, 50, 75), which served me well for 2 decades (although I replaced the 50 cron with the lux asph, and the 28 with the new cron). Having worked already with so many different format cameras in addition to my film Ms, I was used to having lens FOVs change between cameras. With the M8.2, I've still been able to capture the images I've sought (only limited by my skills, not the camera), just like in the film days, with no limitations on quality...since I print small, don't shoot very wide and don't shoot high ISO. These 3 factors, it seems to me, present the greatest opportunities for improvement moving to the M9 (shooting wide, printing big and/or shooting high speed). Nonetheless, I'm pleased Leica has produced the M9 for those like you who can truly benefit from the differences. In the end, more sales benefits all of us. And, who knows, maybe a future M will cause me to rethink my decision to stay with the M8.2. In the meantime, this whole digital thing is going amazingly well...next step might be to install the Quadtone RIP for my Epson to further improve my bw prints. Jeff Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wparsonsgisnet Posted October 27, 2009 Author Share #20 Posted October 27, 2009 l...next step might be to install the Quadtone RIP for my Epson to further improve my bw prints. Jeff Jeff, I am using a separate Epson 1400 for b/w, with the K7 ink set from Cone (InkJetMall). This works very well for me. Cone uses the Quad RIP under his ink set. Highly recommended. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.