Angelos Viskadourakis Posted October 18, 2009 Share #161 Posted October 18, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) Interesting thread, especially the technical side of it. I can't let this comment go by unresponded to, though. Doug Doug if you spent the time to read the thread through especially the post that its post REPLY to, you will find a lot a lot of correlation. Ownership and use of cameras is ONE story and interaction between user-manufacturer is completely something else.I use MINOLTA RF 30 years old so what ,your post has no obvious reason ..:)Each organization needs feed-back and that forum is used for that reason among others,i love my M8.2 ,this is not the point,i use way more than 100 Leica photography products from M to R to compact Digital-i dont remember to miss any- so i have a rather long and deep experience with the company that departs from deep inside the years of film negative,but if you love/care/support someone you are more useful to his existence and progress when you point out things that they are not made the proper way:) My reply was answering to a post that was naming M8 an accident in LEICAS life ,i strongly disagree and there is your correlation. http://bighugelabs.com/onblack.php?id=3878048803&size=large http://bighugelabs.com/onblack.php?id=3878051777&size=large http://bighugelabs.com/onblack.php?id=3320266814&size=large http://www.flickr.com/photos/viskadourakis/ Leica photos . Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted October 18, 2009 Posted October 18, 2009 Hi Angelos Viskadourakis, Take a look here Erwin Puts: The Leica M9: part 5: M8/9 noise and dynamic range. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
ho_co Posted October 18, 2009 Share #162 Posted October 18, 2009 Leica made a statement that the M9 is better than 2/3 of the cameras on the market (I presume DSLRs). ... Carsten--I don't remember hearing that. Can you cite a source? That's in regard to IR sensitivity, I suppose? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Angelos Viskadourakis Posted October 18, 2009 Share #163 Posted October 18, 2009 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! 2500iso jpeg. 1250iso jpeg. Leica M8 35/2 aspherical 2500 iso the first 1250 iso the second. DR & NOISE samples.All lights off, just single candles.Some nr has been applied if i remeber well but post process was mandatory in film days and is in digital days. . Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! 2500iso jpeg. 1250iso jpeg. Leica M8 35/2 aspherical 2500 iso the first 1250 iso the second. DR & NOISE samples.All lights off, just single candles.Some nr has been applied if i remeber well but post process was mandatory in film days and is in digital days. . ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/100096-erwin-puts-the-leica-m9-part-5-m89-noise-and-dynamic-range/?do=findComment&comment=1079235'>More sharing options...
carstenw Posted October 18, 2009 Share #164 Posted October 18, 2009 Carsten--I don't remember hearing that. Can you cite a source? That's in regard to IR sensitivity, I suppose? I don't remember now. Perhaps during the presentation? I will try to find a quote. Yes, that was w.r.t. IR sensitivity. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dcoombs Posted October 18, 2009 Share #165 Posted October 18, 2009 Doug if you spent the time to read the thread through especially the post that its post REPLY to, you will find a lot a lot of correlation. Ownership and use of cameras is ONE story and interaction between user-manufacturer is completely something else.I use MINOLTA RF 30 years old so what ,your post has no obvious reason .. Each organization needs feed-back and that forum is used for that reason among others,i love my M8.2 ,this is not the point,i use way more than 100 Leica photography products from M to R to compact Digital-i dont remember to miss any- so i have a rather long and deep experience with the company that departs from deep inside the years of film negative,but if you love/care/support someone you are more useful to his existence and progress when you point out things that they are not made the proper way:) My reply was answering to a post that was naming M8 an accident in LEICAS life ,i strongly disagree and there is your correlation. On Black: memories of war © 2009 by Angelos Viskadourakis [Large] On Black: memories of war 1 © 2009 by Angelos Viskadourakis [Large] On Black: movie photo © by Angelos Viskadourakis [Large] Flickr: Angelos Viskadourakis' Photostream Leica photos . I actually did read all the posts in this thread, and your comment implies a fault by Leica for which they should be held liable. That is what I disagree with. 'Nuf said. BTW, you don't need to shout. We can all hear you. Finally, thanks for the links to your pictures. They are really good! Doug Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Angelos Viskadourakis Posted October 18, 2009 Share #166 Posted October 18, 2009 Hey Doug sorry if i shout was not my intention:) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted October 18, 2009 Share #167 Posted October 18, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) Carsten--I don't remember hearing that. Can you cite a source? That's in regard to IR sensitivity, I suppose? Afaik the source was at the official introduction on the 9th of September. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted October 18, 2009 Share #168 Posted October 18, 2009 "Reasonably well enough" is of course a subjective, and therefore impossible to disagree with. I would simply say that for me and several others whom I've spoken with, it is not enough to satisfy the demands of our work. Which, I fear, rules out the vast majority of digital cameras for the demands of your work, which I can sympathize with, as I tend to use IR filters on just about any digital camera for just this reason. I might add that the M9 has been good enough for me up till now without filters. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest EarlBurrellPhoto Posted October 18, 2009 Share #169 Posted October 18, 2009 Which, I fear, rules out the vast majority of digital cameras for the demands of your work, which I can sympathize with, as I tend to use IR filters on just about any digital camera for just this reason. I might add that the M9 has been good enough for me up till now without filters. My Canons of the last two generations (1DS-II and -III, 5D and 5D-II) entirely meet my demands for resistance to IR. Blacks are as clean and black as can be, not only by my and my clients'/editors' eyes, but by the numbers in Photoshop as well. Absolutely no contest between them and the M9. Again, I can't speak for Nikons as I have not used one since the original D1, which was rubbish in terms of IR (though ironically, not as much as the M8). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mby Posted October 18, 2009 Share #170 Posted October 18, 2009 Afaik the source was at the official introduction on the 9th of September. Only related statement I could find is in the Leica M9 FAQ: "The effect of the incorporated filter is on the same level as other current professional cameras." Best regards, Michael Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ho_co Posted October 18, 2009 Share #171 Posted October 18, 2009 Afaik the source was at the official introduction on the 9th of September. I don't remember now. Perhaps during the presentation? I will try to find a quote. Yes, that was w.r.t. IR sensitivity. Only related statement I could find is in the Leica M9 FAQ:"The effect of the incorporated filter is on the same level as other current professional cameras." Thanks, all. Don't look further, but thanks for the response! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
markgay Posted October 18, 2009 Share #172 Posted October 18, 2009 Woah. An interesting thread degenerated into something that sounds dangerously close to buyer's remorse (ie, go on the Internet and ask the other guys to assure me I didn't waste my money). As I pointed out on the "recombine M8 and M9 Forums" thread, there are habitually more mentions of the M8 in the M9 forum than the other way around. Go figure. Declaration of Interest: I haven't bought an M9 yet because I'm not paying the price, 280,000 roubles (you do the calc) that they charge in Moscow, but I'm unlikely to resist one when I'm next in UK. I'd welcome a plain comparison of the + and - of the new DRF, without whatever it is that's getting under people's skin. PS, since when did shouting in CAPS become the habit round here? Regards, Mark Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Angelos Viskadourakis Posted October 19, 2009 Share #173 Posted October 19, 2009 Woah. An interesting thread degenerated into something that sounds dangerously close to buyer's remorse (ie, go on the Internet and ask the other guys to assure me I didn't waste my money). PS, since when did shouting in CAPS become the habit round here? Regards, Mark is CAPS not bold that is considering shouting-i saw bold not caps in the thread.The thread is for a noise comparison between M8 & M9 & consequently guides to think if this is a new model or the upgrade step-we all know that the sensor is bigger and so is a new model.Is not about Leica M photographers remorse is about to stay sane and rational. This is anwered already many times by many,no need for more on that. Regarding some posts for "sensless" mr.LEE declarations i attach not mr.LEE's worlds but answers from the company officialy to Dpreview. higher in that page there is a post with M8 2500 iso and 1200 iso,i'm waiting an M9 test in BW with only candle lights & black clothes for evaluation-not software testing but actual photo image. Also i am still waiting for a reply regarding the post for PHASE ONE upgrade and RED ONE upgrade programs. We read "to provide our customers with a long-term assurance of their investment,since you can always bring your camera up to date" ,how long term is that assurance 2,5 years??? is it that bad to ask an official clarification on the subject,thats all is needed a clarification ,i hope that all M users need that,we are going to buy M9,M10,M11 ,R10,R11 maybe S2 anyway but still we need the clarification as the M9 ergonomics changes are exactly what M8 users ask from day one and instead of being applied to their existing M8 were applied only in M9,is not about remorse is just having a clear and respectful relation among the rather small RF community between users and manufacturer. Of course no body is talking for installing the M9 sensor to M8 -we are not that brainless. And always understanding the need of profitability of the company as we care alot for the continuation of the development of the M system -i believe will be very popular very soon. August 2008-12 months earlier in Dpreview Q&A below. Always regarding noise 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/100096-erwin-puts-the-leica-m9-part-5-m89-noise-and-dynamic-range/?do=findComment&comment=1080507'>More sharing options...
mby Posted October 19, 2009 Share #174 Posted October 19, 2009 (...)August 2008-12 months earlier in Dpreview Q&A below. Wouldn't take "we are presently investigating" as a promise, though... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Angelos Viskadourakis Posted October 19, 2009 Share #175 Posted October 19, 2009 any body with images of M9 with few candles only and black clothes in 2500-1250iso???? in BW. For comparison with the BW images from a post higher in that page. i like to read a full sentence to understand the meaning. "to provide our customers with a long-term assurance of their investment,since you can always bring your camera up to date" please someone an M9 image at 2500 iso with 2-3 candles night and black clothes in BW . 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/100096-erwin-puts-the-leica-m9-part-5-m89-noise-and-dynamic-range/?do=findComment&comment=1080557'>More sharing options...
jaapv Posted October 19, 2009 Share #176 Posted October 19, 2009 My Canons of the last two generations (1DS-II and -III, 5D and 5D-II) entirely meet my demands for resistance to IR. Blacks are as clean and black as can be, not only by my and my clients'/editors' eyes, but by the numbers in Photoshop as well. Absolutely no contest between them and the M9. Again, I can't speak for Nikons as I have not used one since the original D1, which was rubbish in terms of IR (though ironically, not as much as the M8). On the M9 I only find a bit of residual IR in extreme circumstances, easy enough to clear up in post - Use LAB and adjust the curve of the "a" channel - it will be gone without harming the overall colour balance. For the record - this will not work sufficiently for the M8 or a number of Nikons - including the RD-1!! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
haroldp Posted October 19, 2009 Share #177 Posted October 19, 2009 I currently use (digitally) Leica's (M8, M9) and Nikon (D3x, D700), and except for landscapes shot on tripod, the decision factor on which to take on a shoot is almost never an IQ issue, but based on other factors. My early tests show that the M9 and D3x are functionally equivalent in IQ for my work, though I would use different optic and techniques to optimize each. I rarely shoot above ISO 400 (never had color film that fast that was any good, tri-x was excellent ), and never above 1200. In my experience even minor variations in technique (pre or post exposure)( or optics ) will swamp any IQ difference inherent in any of these cameras. In the early days of digital when we were going from 3 - 6 MP DSLR's, and ISO 200 was a challenge, these were important questions. Today when friends ( with modern cameras ) ask how to improve IQ, I usually tell them ( in no order of importance ) to: a- get better lenses b- get and use a tripod c- shoot raw, and profile camera, monitor, printer etc. d- expose and focus correctly And most importantly, learn to identify and compose interesting photographs. The equipment we use can be excellent, and well used regardless of whether something else is better or worse (whatever that means). Is a Nikon D700 shot at ISO 1600 ( not great on leica) at F2.8 better or worse than an M9 shot at ISO 400 at F1.4 (Nikon has nothing even close to a 'lux' at F1.4) , who knows, the effect is totally different. I apologize for rambling but I tire of these IQ discussions based on 'whose is bigger' and would welcome more time spent on technique to optimize our IQ with what we have, which today is either M8 or M9. Regards ... Harold Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Angelos Viskadourakis Posted October 19, 2009 Share #178 Posted October 19, 2009 totaly i agree Harold.!!!!!!!!! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.