MikeyM Posted October 20, 2009 Share #1 Posted October 20, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) The current issue (24 Oct 09) of the UK magazine has a full test of the M9 athough I think the reviewer has missed the point - but I'm sure this isn't the place for an unbiased debate ! There is more info on the magazine at About The Magazine - Amateur Photographer - news, camera reviews, lens reviews, camera equipment guides, photography courses, competitions, photography forums Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted October 20, 2009 Posted October 20, 2009 Hi MikeyM, Take a look here M9 Amateur Photographer review. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
adan Posted October 20, 2009 Share #2 Posted October 20, 2009 I bet I can guess the conclusion without even reading: "Wonderful! Terrific! But for the same brass, you can get oh-so-many-more plasti-cams and plasti-zoom kits." Mass-market publications stay in business (if at all) by catering to their markets' prejudices - except dpreview, where Phil Askey actually confessed to buying an M8 for his own use. "No one ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American [or other] public." - H. L. Mencken (as edited by Adan) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Simon Baker Posted October 20, 2009 Share #3 Posted October 20, 2009 The current issue (24 Oct 09) of the UK magazine has a full test of the M9 athough I think the reviewer has missed the point - but I'm sure this isn't the place for an unbiased debate ! Barney Britton is a knowledgeable young man however I do believe he is more at home reviewing the latest dslr techno marvels than a Leica rangefinder ( no offence meant Barney ) . I was surprised that the review was not carried out by the editor .... Damien Demolder, Damien is used to Leica M cameras and to me would have been the obvious choice for carrying out the review, or better still Roger Hicks. AP is a fine magazine however I have noticed that in recent years it has drifted towards all the "techno marvels" be it dslr or compacts, I guess that is where its core readership lies. It has been a very long time since any medium format system has been reviewed for example, go back 10 years and the mag covered a wider spectrum. OK MF digital is beyond the realms of most Amatuers , then again so is a 5k M9, but it would not hurt to review the odd one now and then, after all it does not hesitate to get its hands on the latest 6k+ "Canikon" which when coupled with a few top optics cost as much or more than the Hasselblad H3D II 39 I just bought ! Oddly enough this weeks AP contained a dslr supplement which contained just about every current 35mm based dslr but not a H3 or Mamiya Phase both of which are also dslr, as I said earlier AP today seems content to review the tecno marvels and as such its reviewers seem to have little in depth knowledge of the other options be it RF, MF or LF. Regards Simon Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
250swb Posted October 21, 2009 Share #4 Posted October 21, 2009 AP succeeded in suckering me into buying it this week because of the M9 review, and I wasn't surprised by its quality and got just what I expected. Mike, Simon, and Andy in their posts above have added the rest already. Steve Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
george_b Posted October 21, 2009 Share #5 Posted October 21, 2009 They did comment on how seemingly and quickly the sensor attracted noticable dust. I would like to assume they took the usual prudent precautions. It does raise the dust problem however for ALL digital cameras, Canon (and others) have gone to great lengths on work rounds; no manufacturer as yet has tackled the fundamental design issues that digital sensors by their very nature attract dust. Surley the next technical breakthrough would be to have a sensor which repelled dust inheritant in its design? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
george_b Posted October 21, 2009 Share #6 Posted October 21, 2009 OK MF digital is beyond the realms of most Amatuers , then again so is a 5k M9, Regards Simon So are the latest Canons, look at the UK prices of 1D MkIV, 1Ds MkIII and no doubt a soon to be introduced 1Ds MkIV. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
earleygallery Posted October 21, 2009 Share #7 Posted October 21, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) I thought it was a pretty balanced review to be fair, the reviewer acknowledged that the M9 is without any direct competition and as such is a camera system that 'stands alone'. Bearing in mind that the review will be read by people who have never held a Leica or used a rangefinder type camera, it seems only fair to point out the idosyncrasies of the the camera. AP have always been fans of Leica, it was a Leica special they ran back in the early 80's that prompted me to buy my first one, and I thank them for that! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
euston Posted October 21, 2009 Share #8 Posted October 21, 2009 Mass-market publications stay in business (if at all) by catering to their markets' prejudices The sniffy attitude towards Amateur Photographer from some on this forum comes as no surprise, unfortunately. What you have to remember is that the magazine is not targeted at the Leica in-crowd. I doubt that AP reviewed the M9 because it thinks that a significant proportion of its readers nowadays are Leica customers. However, as a magazine that recently celebrated its 125th anniversary, it does understand the enduring status of the Leica brand in photography and knows that enthusiasts are curious about Leica and how well it has made the transition to digital. If the purpose of the article was to explain the M9 to the curious outsider, I think it succeeded rather well. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bill Posted October 21, 2009 Share #9 Posted October 21, 2009 The sniffy attitude towards Amateur Photographer from some on this forum comes as no surprise, unfortunately. What you have to remember is that the magazine is not targeted at the Leica in-crowd. I doubt that AP reviewed the M9 because it thinks that a significant proportion of its readers nowadays are Leica customers. However, as a magazine that recently celebrated its 125th anniversary, it does understand the enduring status of the Leica brand in photography and knows that enthusiasts are curious about Leica and how well it has made the transition to digital. If the purpose of the article was to explain the M9 to the curious outsider, I think it succeeded rather well. Well said. For all my frustrations with today's AP, I think it was the right thing to do to give it to Mr Britton. He is a young photographer who has grown up with the digital revolution and will take more of an "everyman" view than someone who has used Leica extensively in the past. That said, it was frustrating that they bottled out at the end and gave it a subjective rather than an objective rating. AP is a frustrating magazine to read these days - they seem to have a penchant for landscape, still-life and macro these days - perhaps because these are relatively "safe" pursuits to promote - not much chance of a PCSO feeling your collar for a tabletop still-life... Regards, Bill Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
250swb Posted October 21, 2009 Share #10 Posted October 21, 2009 AP is a frustrating magazine to read these days - they seem to have a penchant for landscape, still-life and macro these days - perhaps because these are relatively "safe" pursuits to promote - not much chance of a PCSO feeling your collar for a tabletop still-life... Regards, Bill Safe, or they are all possible with DSLR's? What AP don't 'get' is the concept of choosing a camera for what it can do, rather than being defeated by what it can't do. The M9 review is just blather, a nod here, a criticism there, and if you'd been beamed down from Mars you'd have little idea why you should choose a Leica M9 over any other hobbled, limited, old fashioned, out of touch, anachronistic non-DSLR camera. Heck, look at the photo's illustrating the article, they hardly scream 'this is what the M9 is about' do they? Britton couldn't even be bothered to point the camera at a typical Leica scene, the sort of thing that made the M series so popular. Yet you could be damned sure to have some fine close ups or graduated tobacco landscapes in a DSLR review. Junk journalism with no thought behind it other than the space that needs filling. Steve Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
earleygallery Posted October 21, 2009 Share #11 Posted October 21, 2009 The M9 review is just blather, a nod here, a criticism there, and if you'd been beamed down from Mars you'd have little idea why you should choose a Leica M9 over any other hobbled, limited, old fashioned, out of touch, anachronistic non-DSLR camera. Have you actually read the review? He states quite clearly that thing the M9 excels at is image quality. Isn't that what Leica is all about? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RRJackson Posted October 21, 2009 Share #12 Posted October 21, 2009 It does raise the dust problem however for ALL digital cameras, Canon (and others) have gone to great lengths on work rounds; no manufacturer as yet has tackled the fundamental design issues that digital sensors by their very nature attract dust. Surley the next technical breakthrough would be to have a sensor which repelled dust inheritant in its design? It seems like you'd have to have some kind of door with interlocks that didn't open until the lens was mounted. That kind of thing would likely take up space. It seems like automated cleaning systems could be developed, though. It's really too fine a job for mammal paws, IMO. It calls for something like a mini-Roomba that attaches like a lens and goes on an automated mission to find and remove dust. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
george_b Posted October 21, 2009 Share #13 Posted October 21, 2009 It seems like you'd have to have some kind of door with interlocks that didn't open until the lens was mounted. That kind of thing would likely take up space. It seems like automated cleaning systems could be developed, though. It's really too fine a job for mammal paws, IMO. It calls for something like a mini-Roomba that attaches like a lens and goes on an automated mission to find and remove dust. No? Just reverse the polarity on the sensor to repel dust. Or a fundamental design change. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jager Posted October 21, 2009 Share #14 Posted October 21, 2009 As George infers, what is needed is a sensor design in which uses an electrical charge to repel dust, rather than attract it, as is currently the case. I could use it on my flat-screen TV too! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jager Posted October 21, 2009 Share #15 Posted October 21, 2009 Oops, George already replied... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bill Posted October 21, 2009 Share #16 Posted October 21, 2009 Is there not a market for a - and forgive me, for I am not an engineer - "lens cap dustbuster" that mounts like a lens, runs on a button battery and sucks/attracts dust? Regards, Bill Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
george_b Posted October 21, 2009 Share #17 Posted October 21, 2009 Is there not a market for a - and forgive me, for I am not an engineer - "lens cap dustbuster" that mounts like a lens, runs on a button battery and sucks/attracts dust? Regards, Bill Sounds good to me as a first stage. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimF Posted October 21, 2009 Share #18 Posted October 21, 2009 The current issue (24 Oct 09) of the UK magazine has a full test of the M9 athough I think the reviewer has missed the point - but I'm sure this isn't the place for an unbiased debate ! Barney Britton is a knowledgeable young man however I do believe he is more at home reviewing the latest dslr techno marvels than a Leica rangefinder ( no offence meant Barney ) . I was surprised that the review was not carried out by the editor .... Damien Demolder, Damien is used to Leica M cameras and to me would have been the obvious choice for carrying out the review, or better still Roger Hicks. AP is a fine magazine however I have noticed that in recent years it has drifted towards all the "techno marvels" be it dslr or compacts, I guess that is where its core readership lies. It has been a very long time since any medium format system has been reviewed for example, go back 10 years and the mag covered a wider spectrum. OK MF digital is beyond the realms of most Amatuers , then again so is a 5k M9, but it would not hurt to review the odd one now and then, after all it does not hesitate to get its hands on the latest 6k+ "Canikon" which when coupled with a few top optics cost as much or more than the Hasselblad H3D II 39 I just bought ! Oddly enough this weeks AP contained a dslr supplement which contained just about every current 35mm based dslr but not a H3 or Mamiya Phase both of which are also dslr, as I said earlier AP today seems content to review the tecno marvels and as such its reviewers seem to have little in depth knowledge of the other options be it RF, MF or LF. Regards Simon On the subject of MFD, I remember seeing in BJP a while ago that they had to go to hire houses to obtain medium format kit for their reviews (which means time limits on how long they have with it), so presumably the MF companies don't send out review samples - in the UK at least? On the same lines, how long is it since you could go to the average high street photo dealer and look at medium format? The MFD dealers tend to be specialist pro outlets now. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
earleygallery Posted October 21, 2009 Share #19 Posted October 21, 2009 Is there not a market for a - and forgive me, for I am not an engineer - "lens cap dustbuster" that mounts like a lens, runs on a button battery and sucks/attracts dust? Regards, Bill Bill, I look forward to seeing you pitch that on Dragons Den! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
haroldp Posted October 21, 2009 Share #20 Posted October 21, 2009 A design that moved the sensor cover glass/filter 2-3 mm further from the sensor surface would put almost all dust so far out of the plane of focus that it would have to be extreme to be a problem, and then would likely manifest itself as lowered contrast. cleaning when necessary would be much less critical. DSLR's cant do this because of clearing mirror hinges. RF cameras can if the lenses do not go to deeply into the body. EVIL (electronic viewfinder interchangeable lens) camera's have the best chance if they keep the clearance n the lens mount specs. just a thought... 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.