efftee Posted September 12, 2009 Share #1 Posted September 12, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) It may, of course, be too soon to summarily judge the M9 but from the scores of reviews, interviews, sample images, etc on the M9 that have already been published, there are at least a few salient points that all had concurred: 1. The M8 and M9 produce very similar images, both in signature and quality. 2. The high ISO performance and IR management were both, to some extent, improved on but not fully resolved. 3. The controls and feature/function selectors were now more ergonomically incorporated for easier and more convenient handling. 4. Manual selection of lenses, ‘soft’ shutter and exposure bracketing are completely new features that users will find very useful. 5. Certain changes, ie top plate screen, no sapphire glass, etc, were made to keep the M9 at a price that more prospects, especially existing Leica users, would be willing to pay. At this juncture, I’d like to say that the following is a critique based on my personal opinion on what I have read and seen of the M9, the tests conducted and published, images, etc. If you need to see my credentials in photography, engineering or access to Leica’s inner sanctum, I thank you not to read on. On points (1) and (2), since both the M8 and M9 share CCDs from Kodak and processors from Jenoptics, images are expectedly similar. Without a major overhaul, it is also expected that old issues could at best be improved on but not completely fixed. The Kodak choice (as opposed to the rumored CMOS) was obviously welcomed but how much difference would the final IQ be -- plugging the high ISO and IR issues into the equation -- if the M9 had used a Maestro chip instead? Maybe no improvements at all but I guess we'll have a better idea when the S2 reviews and more sample images become available. But what struck me most off chord was the 'official' rationale behind foregoing the Maestro chip -- time -- that Leica simply wouldn't be able to roll out the M9 for at least another year otherwise. Which begs the question -- was there a deadline for the M9 to be rolled out? I sure as hell hope it's not just about 090909! It’s not like the M8/8.2 was so deficient or falling so far behind the competition that we’d dump Leica and buy another camera. Frankly, for those like me who choose to shoot DRF, there is no other camera! So, Leica wasn’t about to lose market share if they did not introduce an M9 now, were they? In fact, other than the select few on the inside track, no one really expected a FF M9 before Photokina 2010. Perhaps there was more than meets the eye in what is to be lost or gained but the additional year may not only give Leica more time to deliver a camera more befitting an M9 than what is now quite essentially an M8ff, but would have also given M8 users 13 more months to amortize their M8 investment for a more justifiable upgrade. All this while still continuing to sell M8.2 and grow its own DRF base. Hmm... So that is not to be and whilst the shortcomings of the M9 are few and not critical in any way, they are enough to irk. My biggest gripe is with the M9’s IR management. I had no issue whatsoever with using IR-cut filters on my M8, grateful even that Leica gave me 2 free ones. It may be a workaround but the problem is solved and with the added protection of the front element! With the M9, I’m not sure if I ought to use the filters or not! Without it, the IR influences are clearly visible; with it, risk cyan drifts. Perhaps future firmware upgrades would make things better but for now, I guess another workaround must be added on top of the IR-cut filters – Cornerfix. Next is the high ISO performance of the M9. From the many published ISO tests, especially from the detailed Sean Reid’s analysis, I thought that the M9 performed only marginally better than the M8. Despite Reid’s attempt to reconcile the ‘real’ improvements to the larger image size and print versus screen discernment, the fact remains – the improvements are unimpressive. Sadly, I am not sure if there is an imminent solution to profoundly enhance noise levels at the status quo but surely no longer applicable to the M9. Points (3) to (5), though well-conceived and much appreciated, are IMHO garnishes on the M9. Don't get me wrong, they are excellent additions/changes and I, for one, am glad that Leica listened to its customers and taken steps to appease us. That said, their absence did not make the M8 a deal breaker and they are certainly not going to carry the weight of expectations of the M9 on their own. The real meat lies in the sole fact that the M9 is full-frame. Not taking anything away from the technical feat of fitting a larger sensor into the existing form factor, but if you’ve not already jumped, is the M9 enough camera for you to make the switch? I have sold my M8 and my preordered M9 is increasingly looking likely to miss its promised delivery date (mid next week), at which time I am no longer obliged to make the purchase. If I do still end up with one, I wonder if it would be because of the M9, or for the Leica glass that I still own. Thank you for reading and if I made any errors or missed anything, I look forward to your corrections. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted September 12, 2009 Posted September 12, 2009 Hi efftee, Take a look here The M9 three days on.... I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
Guest BigSplash Posted September 12, 2009 Share #2 Posted September 12, 2009 (edited) I totally agree with all of your comments. I bought my M8 in July and am very happy with it and do not currently see the reason to upgrade to M9 as you plan to do....there is NOT enough difference between the two cameras. I also believe that there will now be in the not too distant future a M10 with Maestro chips maybe and an improved sensor. . Maybe at Photokina Sept 21-26 in 2010 or better still what about "10-10-10" for shipments in early 2011? Such a move would allow sales of M9 at a high level through the rest of 2009 and all of 2010 with 2011 being the next surge. Edited September 12, 2009 by andybarton Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rosuna Posted September 12, 2009 Share #3 Posted September 12, 2009 IBut what struck me most off chord was the 'official' rationale behind foregoing the Maestro chip -- time -- that Leica simply wouldn't be able to roll out the M9 for at least another year otherwise. Right! Leica needs sales now. Now, not in 2011. That's all. I was very surprised by the M9 presentation. I also will wait for a "up-to-date" and state of the art M camera. Maybe next year. The M cameras are reportage cameras, not medium format backs. The X1 will have better high ISO performance, and this is shocking. I am not happy with the M8. The cropped sensor is one reason, but it is not the only one. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shootist Posted September 12, 2009 Share #4 Posted September 12, 2009 If at this time you do not own any Leica M cameras, film or digital, you could sell all your Leica glass for what I think would be a good price on the used market since the M9 is bound to bring new users into the Leica fold and glass will be hard to come by just like it was when the M8 came out. That means the glass is worth more now then it was 1/2-5 months ago. This could solve all your problems, thinking about buying the M9 with it flaws and having all that glass around doing nothing. I've even considered this myself. IE, selling my last M8 and all my glass and moving on to something else. The only problem with that for me is I'd rather shoot with a RF, like the digital age where you know you either got the shot or didn't 1-4 seconds after you took it and Leica is the only game in town (and the simple fact that I fell in love with Leica M cameras back in 1972 and that love has not yet left. Like other loves I've had in my life). Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Ash Posted September 12, 2009 Share #5 Posted September 12, 2009 I have sold my M8 and my preordered M9 is increasingly looking likely to miss its promised delivery date (mid next week), at which time I am no longer obliged to make the purchase. If I do still end up with one, I wonder if it would be because of the M9, or for the Leica glass that I still own. To come to a final decision is quite easy. Just answer the following questions to yourself: 1) Do you really want to skip your Leica glass? 2) Do you prefer to shoot with a rangefinder or SLRs? To wait one or two weeks for the new camera should not be the basis of the decision. Regards Steve Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jager Posted September 12, 2009 Share #6 Posted September 12, 2009 Time was of the essence for Leica. Waiting another year to further improve the M9 before delivering it would have meant another year of diminished revenues. In the same way, the development of the M10 must already be started. The world of digital is unforgiving for aged products. And, yes, the M8/M8.2 were aged. The M9 was quite timely in several important respects for Leica. I look forward to mine. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
M. Valdemar Posted September 12, 2009 Share #7 Posted September 12, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) What a bunch of crybabies. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
brill64 Posted September 12, 2009 Share #8 Posted September 12, 2009 What a bunch of crybabies. ??? anyways..moving on: 09/09/10 doesn't quite have the same ring to it, really. maybe maestro will be applied to the m by then and maybe not. whatever is happening, modifications, additions and upgrades introduced incrementally would appear to be the norm now based on m8/m8.2 and it seems to be a market strategy that works for leica. i think most m-people would want to be using the ff now rather than next year and from what i can assume from watching this forum, are both eager and willing to dispose of nearly us$7,000 for what are in effect minor upgrades from the m8. no mean feat for that amount of money. i'd be inclined to go ahead with your order and try your very best not to sell any of your leica glass if you can Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sean_reid Posted September 12, 2009 Share #9 Posted September 12, 2009 . The X1 will have better high ISO performance, and this is shocking. Hi Ruben, What makes you say that? You've tested an X1? Cheers, Sean Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
marknorton Posted September 12, 2009 Share #10 Posted September 12, 2009 I recognise Leica need the revenue lifeline the M9 provides and I'm happy to participate even though I'm not completely comfortable with the cost cutting and just a feeling - so far unsubstantiated - it may have been rushed. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
brill64 Posted September 12, 2009 Share #11 Posted September 12, 2009 I recognise Leica need the revenue lifeline the M9 provides and I'm happy to participate even though I'm not completely comfortable with the cost cutting and just a feeling - so far unsubstantiated - it may have been rushed. i am inclined to agree with you although i'm not in a position to own an m9 at present. how else could leica fund further development of medium format and production of the s2? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rosuna Posted September 12, 2009 Share #12 Posted September 12, 2009 Hi Ruben, What makes you say that? You've tested an X1? Cheers, Sean Can you think on any CMOS APS-C camera currently on the market with worse noise performance than the M8? Really? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
offshore Posted September 12, 2009 Share #13 Posted September 12, 2009 My opinion, for what it's worth (I don't charge for it), the most compelling reason to buy an M9 is the full frame sensor. As has been stated in reviews some of the issues M8 users experienced have been marginally improved and in some instances, in the case of software, could have been improved in the M8 by a firmware upgrade. The choice of using a cropped or FF sensor is an individual decision based on personal factors related to the type of photography one does or personal desire. So far I like what I see in the M9 and feel that Leica have achieved a milestone in rangefinder photography long before I thought they could. My hesitation in purchasing the M9 has more to do with whether or not Leica fulfills their statement that the M8 is an upgradeable camera not a replaceable camera. Will Leica continue to support and improve the M8 or abandon it? Some forum members have criticized this as naive and have missed the point. Leica have established themselves, in the photographic sense, by building cameras that last many generations and have enabled that by supporting them through service and reliability. If Leica reneges on the M8 and abandons it as an ugly step child, no longer supports it through firmware upgrades and service it sends a message that they have bought into the replaceable, throw away mentality of the Japanese camera manufacturers and will give me pause on spending my money on an M9 or any future M. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
efftee Posted September 12, 2009 Author Share #14 Posted September 12, 2009 If at this time you do not own any Leica M cameras, film or digital, you could sell all your Leica glass for what I think would be a good price on the used market since the M9 is bound to bring new users into the Leica fold and glass will be hard to come by just like it was when the M8 came out. That means the glass is worth more now then it was 1/2-5 months ago. This could solve all your problems, thinking about buying the M9 with it flaws and having all that glass around doing nothing. I've even considered this myself. IE, selling my last M8 and all my glass and moving on to something else. The only problem with that for me is I'd rather shoot with a RF, like the digital age where you know you either got the shot or didn't 1-4 seconds after you took it and Leica is the only game in town (and the simple fact that I fell in love with Leica M cameras back in 1972 and that love has not yet left. Like other loves I've had in my life). I know what you mean about the RF love affair; I'd use my iPhone than DSLR any day. If my preorder M9 does fall through, I might just get an used M8.2 and see what Leica comes up with at Photokina. Or maybe I'll still get an M9. Dunno. Just feeling a little deflated after the frenzy. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikelc Posted September 12, 2009 Share #15 Posted September 12, 2009 If at this time you do not own any Leica M cameras, film or digital, you could sell all your Leica glass for what I think would be a good price on the used market since the M9 is bound to bring new users into the Leica fold and glass will be hard to come by just like it was when the M8 came out. That means the glass is worth more now then it was 1/2-5 months ago. This could solve all your problems, thinking about buying the M9 with it flaws and having all that glass around doing nothing. I've even considered this myself. IE, selling my last M8 and all my glass and moving on to something else. The only problem with that for me is I'd rather shoot with a RF, like the digital age where you know you either got the shot or didn't 1-4 seconds after you took it and Leica is the only game in town (and the simple fact that I fell in love with Leica M cameras back in 1972 and that love has not yet left. Like other loves I've had in my life). ...i think it helps a great deal here to step back and take the longer view...the m9 clearly represents a step forward from the m8 which despite all the complaining about -the m8 that is- has been far an away the loved camera of choice for all of us here and for good reason ...i have the 5d2 with some pretty good canon, leica r and zeiss glass that i use for weddings and events of that nature and then only because i can't seem to ever work well with flash so the automatic everything and high iso make that a better choice for me and only in these circumstances but for everything else i use my m8 with m glass and am in love and have been since i made the switch in 06 ....i'm happy that the files are similar in both the m8 and m9...now i can upgrade my m8.2 (which i upgraded to in april) without worrying about letting go of that wonderful look the m8 files produce ...does the M9 appear to be perfect? ....nope and why should it nothing else in life is..just wish there was a bit more improvement in high iso but certainly no deal breaker for me.we are all lucky to be living at a time where technology is moving at such incredible speed as to be continuously offering all of us better and better cameras to choose from....and to think all this wonderful m glass can now be used FF! ...I'm not worried about what the m10 will do or when it comes out though i know when it comes around it will undoubtably be an improvement to the m9 ..that's the nature of all this and how lucky we are that these changes are happening so fast...just imagine what will be introduced on 2020 ...hopefully the m line or its evolution will still exist by then...and even more hopefully i'll still be alive to enjoy it all ..in the meantime i'm awaiting my m9 and will love it i'm sure even more than my m8 mike mikecettadotcom Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamie Roberts Posted September 12, 2009 Share #16 Posted September 12, 2009 Can you think on any CMOS APS-C camera currently on the market with worse noise performance than the M8? Really? Ruben-- Actually, to be completely honest, I cannot think of 1 CMOS APS-C camera designed in 2005 and shipped in 2006 (when the M8 was) that has anything like the IQ--including noise performance--that the M8 had. But we're not talking about the M8, are we? The M9 doesn't have the same limitations as the M8 though--so I'm missing your point. I do think there will be (over the next 3 or 4 months time perhaps) the finishing points on the firmware, which, while not "rushed" isn't usually finished by any manufacturer at release. What do I expect? Better throughput, better chimping, and yes, refinements of the color and noise characteristics of the M9. A full-frame digital M with a kick-ass sensor, great ergonomics, uncompressed RAW files and printable ISO 1600 (or 2000 even) is nothing to be missed, IMO. I mean, sure--I can wait till 2011 for the next generation, but I might get hit by a bus in the meantime... Life is short; the M9 looks truly significant and workable in so many ways the M8 was not. I fail to see why anyone interested in a digital rangefinder would wait another 3 years to get such a wonderful camera, unless, of course, you're already totally happy with an M8.2... Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BigSplash Posted September 12, 2009 Share #17 Posted September 12, 2009 My opinion, for what it's worth (I don't charge for it), the most compelling reason to buy an M9 is the full frame sensor. As has been stated in reviews some of the issues M8 users experienced have been marginally improved and in some instances, in the case of software, could have been improved in the M8 by a firmware upgrade. The choice of using a cropped or FF sensor is an individual decision based on personal factors related to the type of photography one does or personal desire. So far I like what I see in the M9 and feel that Leica have achieved a milestone in rangefinder photography long before I thought they could. My hesitation in purchasing the M9 has more to do with whether or not Leica fulfills their statement that the M8 is an upgradeable camera not a replaceable camera. Will Leica continue to support and improve the M8 or abandon it? Some forum members have criticized this as naive and have missed the point. Leica have established themselves, in the photographic sense, by building cameras that last many generations and have enabled that by supporting them through service and reliability. If Leica reneges on the M8 and abandons it as an ugly step child, no longer supports it through firmware upgrades and service it sends a message that they have bought into the replaceable, throw away mentality of the Japanese camera manufacturers and will give me pause on spending my money on an M9 or any future M. I totally agree that M9 firmware should be made available for M8 users. I think your logic is correct. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
efftee Posted September 12, 2009 Author Share #18 Posted September 12, 2009 the M9 looks truly significant and workable in so many ways the M8 was not. Jamie, can you elaborate please? I want so much to believe you. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bo_Lorentzen Posted September 12, 2009 Share #19 Posted September 12, 2009 (edited) Efftee, My M9 is probably going to be late also, but without a doubt, a full-frame M is not a incremental improvement to a 8. when I was formulating my thoughts on my blog page, I was most struck by the effect on my favorite print size (what my old 2200 can print) 13x19 - M8 look simply fantastic at 172dpi... the M9 at the same size is 270dpi... that is 100 dots more per inch. instead of shooting with the 28cron for a 35mm look, I can shoot a 35lux (YEAH) which have a 1 stop advantage, so even if there is no iso improvement what so ever the bigger image and ability to use smaller faster lenses is a big difference. What I really wanted to say is. you already ordered yours, keep it. we both know once you get your hands on it, its going to be love. and more important, its going to be a lot more great images. I for one would not want to wait 1 or 2 years for a FF M, both my work and private images will benefit from FF today. . Edited September 12, 2009 by Bo_Lorentzen forgot... Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
chris_tribble Posted September 12, 2009 Share #20 Posted September 12, 2009 Thank you for reading and if I made any errors or missed anything, I look forward to your corrections. I suppose the one thing you're missing is the experience of using it (). I'm smiling each time I look at an image as the lenses I've invested in are now working as they were designed to work. For me this is sufficient justification, and I'm now working out how to finance the second M9 body so that I can work the way I like to work with an M system. Went for lunch with friends in Chorlton (Manchester UK) today and did a bit of shopping in the local deli's. Just street stuff, but for me it's the difference. My 35 is a 35, my 50 is a 50. And I have access to a genuine wide (28) without putting on an external finder, and have access to REAL wides again with the Zeiss 18 and Leica 21 elmarit. THIS is why I've got the the M9. If you've got one lens, one body and you're happy, then it may no be worth it for the extra stop - but if you've got a working system and need to work the whole range of M lenses, then the fact that you now can do this AND you get an extra stop of useably ISO is worth every penny IMHO. Some samples below ... and remember - having IQ that is slightly better than M8 (which is remarkably good) and having full frame, is close to miraculous from where I stand. I'm a happy bunny. And don't worry to much about the chatter re red skin tones - a tweak in the LR default for the M9 and all's well so far as I'm concerned... Great if there's a firmware improvement or LR camera profile improvement (which there will be), but as they stand, the 14bit 18MP files are wonderful things to work with.... 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! Quote 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/96453-the-m9-three-days-on/?do=findComment&comment=1031344'>More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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.