DFV Posted January 9, 2010 Share #1 Posted January 9, 2010 Advertisement (gone after registration) As with everything I buy I try to be a pragmatic and honest as possible. Just because I own it it does not mean that it is the best or perfect. Even if it where the best it could still have room for improvement and if it is the best for me it might not be so for somebody else. So I generally respect the opinions of others provided they respect mine. I many ways I carry my life as a purist or fundamentalist (in the good sense) but I do not enforce my opinions on others since this prevents me to get a wider range of them and make up my own. My goal is not hear from you guys what you think is missing in the new M9 (leaving some initial and expected quality issue aside) since the list of request could be long. Instead I would like to know your feeling on the things that where removed in the latest version of the M. (To be completely honest I must say I expected a bit more than just a full frame sensor from the M9. Things like a more informative LCD screen (the one on top), more "physical" knobs/buttons for fast settings (not push buttons around a screen). I was just holding an old Contax "G2" and is is very useful to have proper knobs for fast setting rather that going to a menu and select the options even if you have four different profiles.) Anyway, there are two things that bother me that have been left out with the new M9. 1. I miss the small LCD battery and frame indicator on the top immensely. I find it very useful on my M8.2 since there is no need to go into the screen to check. It's fast and to the point. Actually it is practical too since it does not drain battery power and in situations where I am low on battery it allows me to turn off the picture preview and go through the whole day without any problems. It is one of those things that is part of the past and does, with the preview off, take you back to how it is/was when I shot with my M6. Back then one just had to make sure everything was right. Now with this format you shoot, check, good... if not, shoot again, check, shoot again... Well, in a way digital has given a huge advantage by guaranteeing the shot yet a lot of "magic" and anticipation is lost. Sometimes I could not wait to go to the lab and develop my prints to see the results. It was very gratifying to see that you actually took the shot you wanted. 2. I have done quite a lot of IR photography in the past and the lack or poor performance of the UV/IR filter on the M8 was actually to my benefit. I admit I was one of those surprised/outraged at first with this, well, "flaw". Yet over time I actually became to realize it was a benefit. Now with the new sensor filter on the M9 I have seen many mention and cheer that there is no longer need to add the UV/IR filters to the lenses. I am not one of them. In the first place I always use UV filters and that is not necessarily for filtering UV rays. my main reason is for protection and second because they are easier to clean on the field than the actual lenses. The less I touch my lens the better. With the M9 it is actually much more difficult to get the IR effect since I do not have the option of removing/replacing the UR/IR filter. Those black skies and white foliage that where so eery and characteristic will never be the same again. (If any have ideas as to how to compensate or fix this with the M9 please let me know.) The loss of the sapphire glass is debatable but at this time I don't know if the advantage in the reduction in cost and loss of weight is better than resistance to wear. This is a question to be answered by all of us after some time has passed. My main hobby is watches and sapphire glass is very much the standard in mid-range watches and upwards. One thing everybody must know is that the more scratch resistant the glass the more brittle and therefore can break on impact. It is much more likely that the current plastic screen is more resistant to a strong impact than sapphire glass. One could shatter while the other would get a nasty dent or scratch. In the field you are better of with a dent or scratch than a shattered glass, believe me. So as I said; this one I leave for a later date. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted January 9, 2010 Posted January 9, 2010 Hi DFV, Take a look here Things I miss on my M9. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
AGeoJO Posted January 9, 2010 Share #2 Posted January 9, 2010 Yes, I agree with your notion about missing the small LCD display on the M9 but it makes the top plate cleaner and sleeker. I scrambled back then to get those UV/IR cut filters and we ended up paying top dollars back then. Now, I have a stack of them I am not using anymore. Is there any harm of keeping them as protective filters (heaven forbid) on your lenses? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
scott kirkpatrick Posted January 9, 2010 Share #3 Posted January 9, 2010 I scrambled back then to get those UV/IR cut filters and we ended up paying top dollars back then. Now, I have a stack of them I am not using anymore. Is there any harm of keeping them as protective filters (heaven forbid) on your lenses? I've compared colors as shot with and without the filters and on lenses with 35mm focal length and greater I see no difference and no green in the corners. In low light, however, any "protective filter" may introduce unpredictable reflections. scott Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
adan Posted January 9, 2010 Share #4 Posted January 9, 2010 I like the more "detailed" view of the battery/SD remaining available through the rear LCD. I just don't find hitting one button that big a deal. The M9 would have been DOA in my case if it had a top LCD large enough to show the precison of the rear LCD. On the whole, a minor issue though. I would not have complained if the M9 had an M8-style silver LCD on top (but might have moved it to the right side - a la film M counters ) I would not object to very subtle implementations of, for example, an analog exposure compensation lever around/under the shutter dial. Realistically, as with the M8, I just leave exp. comp set to -1/3 to protect highlights, and do my real exposure comp in raw development. Actually, I kind of liked the plethora of analog dials on the Contax Gs and RX SLR - but I've also learned to work with the minimalist-Leica controls. IR photography is quite possible with the M9 - it just takes a lot more exposure. No problem at all in the bright sunlight that gives white trees. You even get the "benefit" of noise equivalent to IR film grain, by using ISO 1600 or so: http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/leica-m9-forum/104557-so-ir-sensitive-m9.html I have no desire to ever have to put pink filters on lenses again - traded mine as part of the M9 purchase (quick, before anyone realized they were a thing of the past - which probably means I made a profit, since 4 of the 6 were free from Leica originally) Sapphire glass - IMHO any change that makes Leicas appeal less to the chi-chi camera-jewelry crowd (and reduces the price) is a plus. Never considered it for the M8s as an upgrade. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted January 9, 2010 Share #5 Posted January 9, 2010 Sweeping statements from one small LCD. Especially as the camera flashes "battery Low" on the rear LCD when he battery gets (very) low. The " downgrade " takes better images quality-wise in my experience. I find that slightly more important... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
!Nomad64 Posted January 9, 2010 Share #6 Posted January 9, 2010 I do not have an M9 myself, but if I had it I'd subscribe your point of view. Furthermore I'd miss the real chrome version. From what I can read, paint is quite easy to scratch. I understand it's to be regarded as a tool and as such it is subject to wear, but I see no point in paying 5,500 Eur for a camera that in one year will have a worse appearance than my dad's Canon rangefinder of the '50s. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ggits Posted January 9, 2010 Share #7 Posted January 9, 2010 Advertisement (gone after registration) I am not disappointed at all !! Any who wanted to buy an M9 could see "tons" of review - picture of everything - each menu option - etc. So taking the reviews into account before buying it is difficult to be disappointed. This does not mean that there is no place for improvement in M9. Some can be done in firmware, but the main issues could only be done in next model do to the fact that every electronic piece only use "yesterdays technology" and that technology barrier will be moved every day. So waiting for the perfect is a never ending story. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jager Posted January 9, 2010 Share #8 Posted January 9, 2010 I miss the Sapphire glass over the LCD. Being able to toss my upgraded M8 into bags or cases or such, sans any kind of protective cover, was quite welcome. Now I'm back to having the scratch-susceptibility of the M9 LCD intrude into my consciousness, a niggling distraction. I'd have also preferred chrome, though I find my Steel Grey model to not look all that different from my (chrome) M6, M7, and M8. And after a couple months of daily use - my M9 goes everywhere with me, including to work - mine has evinced no evidence of wear. That's really it. I very much like the mimimalist ethos that has always been a part of the M system. Having a bunch of knobs and buttons a la just about every other digital body out there would be a tragic mistake, IMHO. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wlaidlaw Posted January 9, 2010 Share #9 Posted January 9, 2010 I would have liked a higher res LCD screen, although the M9 one does seem a touch sharper than my M8 one, even though my M8 has sapphire glass. This is especially evident looking at menus and 'set'. When cheap P&S cameras now have 920,000 pixel and/or OLED screens, I am disappointed that Leica did not do better. The plastic cover seems clearer than the original M8 one and maybe more scratch resistant. Having been out shooting in the Arctic conditions we have in the UK at the moment, I am annoyed I still have to keep taking my M9 in and out of a bag, due to its continuing lack of the most basic weather-proofing. It would not have been a huge task to at least waterproof the on/off/mode selector switch, frame selector and shoe, which are probably the most obvious areas for water ingress during rain/snow. If you put a tiny smear of silicone grease on the lens mount, like I do, I think it would keep at least rain or snow out. I accept that putting an O ring seal on the bayonet might have been too difficult. The top LCD was a nice feature on the M8 but I am managing fine without it. Wilson Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jsjxyz Posted January 9, 2010 Share #10 Posted January 9, 2010 I would love to see the ISO setting from the info menu. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
yanidel Posted January 9, 2010 Share #11 Posted January 9, 2010 I don't get it, the loss of the top LCD means to some that the M9 is a downgrade vs the M8.2 and does not warrant its purchase ? To me and coming from the M8 and R-D1, the M9 is a complete camera. Of course, a few small improvements here and there are always welcome (higher minimum speed on Auto-ISO's, I am persistent ... ) but to say it is is a downgrade vs M8.2 based on criterias that have zero influence on the final image is pushing it a bit. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rolo Posted January 9, 2010 Share #12 Posted January 9, 2010 I don't get it, the loss of the top LCD means to some that the M9 is a downgrade vs the M8.2 I think it is. I shot 950 images at a wedding last week using 3.5 batteries and each battery change was forced by a shut-down. Whenever I checked, there was 35% power left and ten frames later it was off. I don't mind carrying batteries; I don't mind changing them; but being caught out like this is not how it should be for a Pro user, IMO. Last week on a personal shoot, the battery was fine for 350 shots at a slllooooowwww pace. One thing I do find is a pain in the ASS is, pressing the SET button when the display is on and being asked if I want to 'protect the image'. I NEVER want to protect the image. If I press the SET button it's because I want the SET menu and I don't want to switch the screen off before I do it ! Needs to be fixed for me to reduce the number of expletives I utter when the thing doesn't do as it's told. M8, fine for those that want it. I'm not one of them. The M9 is the dog's B's . Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
yanidel Posted January 9, 2010 Share #13 Posted January 9, 2010 Disregarding the slight improvement in image quality of the M9 - and they are slight or even immaterial in real-world situations - the M9 is a worse camera than the M8.2 from an ergonomic or usability standpoint. I agree that IQ wise, the difference is not what should drive the upgrade, my decision was based on FF. Yet, Have you tried the soft release ? Have you tried the ISO wheel ? Have you tried compensation through the wheel ? Can you select your lenses through a menu ? Can you bracket ? The M9 is overall not worse in ergonomics or usability than the M8.2, there are many important improvements that offset by far the loss of the LCD or sapphire glass that had no impact on the pictures, but only on the gear itself. I think you are a bit biased towards the camera you know very well. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marty Posted January 9, 2010 Share #14 Posted January 9, 2010 I NEVER want to protect the image. +1 Getting rid of the protect button was a great leap in the right direction. Now please let's take that last little step and remove this overrated feature altogether. It is a sensitive topic I know, but it is too philosophical. I bet the chances of accidentally deleting an image that someone has failed to protect are nil anyway; at least less than dropping the camera off a cliff. And whoever has the discipline to protect individual images surely has the discipline to not delete images. If for some inexplicable reason it really has to stay, please just put it somewhere in the set or main menu, as a menu item. Oh and I miss the silver/chrome finish too Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bybrett Posted January 9, 2010 Share #15 Posted January 9, 2010 I think it is. I shot 950 images at a wedding last week using 3.5 batteries and each battery change was forced by a shut-down. Whenever I checked, there was 35% power left and ten frames later it was off. I don't mind carrying batteries; I don't mind changing them; but being caught out like this is not how it should be for a Pro user, IMO. Last week on a personal shoot, the battery was fine for 350 shots at a slllooooowwww pace. Same here, I don't miss the counter as you can buy bigger cards, but the battery keeps catching me out. Even the S2 has a battery indicator on top always on... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted January 9, 2010 Share #16 Posted January 9, 2010 +1 Getting rid of the protect button was a great leap in the right direction. Now please let's take that last little step and remove this overrated feature altogether. It is a sensitive topic I know, but it is too philosophical. I bet the chances of accidentally deleting an image that someone has failed to protect are nil anyway; at least less than dropping the camera off a cliff. And whoever has the discipline to protect individual images surely has the discipline to not delete images. If for some inexplicable reason it really has to stay, please just put it somewhere in the set or main menu, as a menu item. Oh and I miss the silver/chrome finish too Please don't get rid of it. I protect images I want to keep, and then hit " delete all" A perfect way to clean up a shoot. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bybrett Posted January 9, 2010 Share #17 Posted January 9, 2010 Please don't get rid of it. I protect images I want to keep, and then hit " delete all" A perfect way to clean up a shoot. Wow that's confidence...! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
russell Posted January 9, 2010 Share #18 Posted January 9, 2010 I miss the smaller sized of the earlier film Ms. We've been slowly getting larger with TTL taller and with M8 fatter. If anything I'd hope we go smaller (back to the IIIf) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rolo Posted January 9, 2010 Share #19 Posted January 9, 2010 Please don't get rid of it. I protect images I want to keep, and then hit " delete all" A perfect way to clean up a shoot. Delete All ? I can't imagine doing that on a commercial shoot with any camera. I occasionally delete individual frames, but even that is risky when client' work is at stake. Suppose this is why we've all got different requirements. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andym911 Posted January 9, 2010 Share #20 Posted January 9, 2010 Can someone post a quality comparison of M8/M8.2 vs M9? I hear often that the image quality of the M9 is 'better', would like to see it. as from what I have seen so far I am not convinced....if anyone can also include in some comparable images, skin tones and black fabric etc.. would be very helpful to many members I think. regards andy p.s I have M8.2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.