spersky Posted November 20, 2009 Share #101 Posted November 20, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) My dealer had a black one and I told him to give it to the next person. If I were going to spend $7K, it better be perfect in every angle I use it or look at it. The more I think about it, the more unlikely I will get it. I just bought the D3X a few weeks ago and I am happy as a clam. There are no issues to worry about except where is my next location shooting. See that idea would not work for me. I never ever bring my heavy DSLR kit. It is just pretty sitting on my shelves. My Leica M9 goes with me everywhere. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted November 20, 2009 Posted November 20, 2009 Hi spersky, Take a look here Interest in M9 weakening?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
Guest EarlBurrellPhoto Posted November 20, 2009 Share #102 Posted November 20, 2009 The improvement is about 2 stops and in my opinion more than "slightly" You're the first person I've heard boast that the M9 improves by 2 stops. No-one I know who has or had an M9 could wrest more than a stop. Perhaps with better raw conversion it will end up a stop and a half. If you can prove 2 stops, please do. I haven't experienced any IR problems with the M9 so far. Authoritative reviewers didn't experience any IR problems with the early M8 sans filters, either With the M9 it's a matter of degree. In some situations the IR issue is there, and for some clients it's more than they can tolerate. Fixing it in post may be do-able, but not cost-effective for a busy pro...at least that's my business opinion. {refers to lack of top screen}is that really that important, not to choose the M9 ??? For me, yes. Lighting up the rear screen whilst shooting in the theatre calls unwanted negative attention to myself. A dim back-light to the top screen would've been a forward solution. Deletion was pure costcutting, IMO. Leica decided to go back to the 1m calibrated lines because of uniformity. All Leica analog cameras (which are "FF") are adjusted to 1m. The only exeption was the non FF M8.2. Furthermore, the most photos with the a FF M are typically not taken with focus on 1m distance, so that the higher accuracity at 1m is of lesser interest for most FF M photographers. They have discussed this subject extensively and consciously made this decison and will not change it anymore. That may all be true, but the 2m framelines were hard-fought by many pros, they are a significant improvement in practice, and the reversion to 1m framelines in the M9 is a step backward. Right, but the much higher image quality IS. Again, if you have photographic proof that the M9's IQ is much higher than the M8's, please post or link to it. So far I've not seen any such evidence, or heard anyone with a respectable reputation as a photographer describe the improvement in those terms. Wrong. There will be a firmware update soon, which will solve a lot of known problems. There won't be any hardware updates or upgrades in the near future.Later there will be additional options such as an optional sapphire glas. There might come a sapphire glas as standard when the sensor prices will drop in the future. It's too expensive at the moment. Oh I apologise! I didn't realise you were on Leica's product developpment team:rolleyes: Wasn't you already complaining about the high costs of the M9? No I "weren't" Well, only in the sense that since it doesn't suit me professionally it's a lot to spend for personal-use-only (I know that's a difficult concept for many to understand...my dentist, physician and lawyer don't get it at all ) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted November 20, 2009 Share #103 Posted November 20, 2009 That may all be true, but the 2m framelines were hard-fought by many pros, they are a significant improvement in practice, and the reversion to 1m framelines in the M9 is a step backwards Err..which pros. Most complaints I read were by amateurs, quite a number by persons who hadn't an inkling of the way RF framelines work. Don't get me wrong, I have a mild preference for 2 m lines as well, but I have read posts complaining of cut-off heads on the M8.2 Which just goes to show that this is by no means an absolute. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest EarlBurrellPhoto Posted November 20, 2009 Share #104 Posted November 20, 2009 Err..which pros.:confused:Most complaints I read were by amateurs, quite a number by persons who hadn't an inkling of the way RF framelines work. That's not how I would characterise Sean Reid, who was one of the most vocal proponents and IIRC had input with Leica to press for the change. But I suppose you've a right to your own opinion. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted November 20, 2009 Share #105 Posted November 20, 2009 Most- not all Sean is a great guy - so I will assume that he is your "many"- like a one-man band Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
charlesphoto99 Posted November 20, 2009 Share #106 Posted November 20, 2009 I would say the M9 gives about two stops better iso performance, in part because my 35 1.4 is now a 35 and not a 28 cron. It's all relative of course - one person's eye is different from another's. I find the M9 noise to be very film like and that works for me. Boy Earl, you really hate the M9 don't you. You are sounding like a jealous teenage girl. At this point it seems pretty much a full time job for you. Why don't you give it a rest and enjoy what you have. The M8 is a fantastic camera and if it works for you that's great. Some of us want full frame, price be damned. Simple as that. Yes, there are issues (like SLOOOOWW zooming) but I'm sure Leica are working on those. No camera is going to be perfect. I really don't understand people who want an M to be a 5d, a Gf1 and a D3 all in one. It isn't. The M series has always been what it is and the M9 continues that tradition. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest EarlBurrellPhoto Posted November 20, 2009 Share #107 Posted November 20, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) Most- not all Sean is a great guy - so I will assume that he is your "many"- like a one-man band Well, you know what they say about making assumptions...But if if makes you feel like a bigger man, far be it from me to spoil it for you I would say the M9 gives about two stops better iso performance, in part because my 35 1.4 is now a 35 and not a 28 cron. It's all relative of course - one person's eye is different from another's. The last statement happens to be true, but that doesn't detract from the fallacy in the explanation you offer to "support" your assertion that the improvement is 2 stops. I find the M9 noise to be very film like and that works for me.Read the same thing verbatim and ad infinitum w.r.t. the M8...so how is the M9 better? Boy Earl, you really hate the M9 don't you.I've said many times that I like the camera but several things about it make it impractical for my professional use, would buy it (and may, eventually) for my personal use. You are sounding like a jealous teenage girl. Ah, yes, of course...that's it...everyone who doesn't own an M9 must be unable to afford one and hence envious. Now, that's a feature of the M9 I suspect weighed heavily in certain individuals' decision to purchase Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted November 20, 2009 Share #108 Posted November 20, 2009 Earl, it still doesn't answer the question I posed before: what the heck are you doing hammering away on the M9 forum, not owning the camera, not wanting the camera and not liking the camera, at least professionally:confused: Feel free to give your opinion, but this is bordering on a campaign. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mwalker649 Posted November 20, 2009 Share #109 Posted November 20, 2009 I've said many times that I like the camera but several things about it make it impractical for my professional use, would buy it (and may, eventually) for my personal use. We get it....why dwell on it...move on Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wattsy Posted November 20, 2009 Share #110 Posted November 20, 2009 I don't think it's in Earl's nature to move on. It was the same when he posted as Vinnay, Cordell and all the other noms de plume. It's always the same MO - repetition of the same basic point over and over like a broken record, never any photos to show (or website to look at), crying like an unloved schoolboy that other posters are getting away with stuff the moderators shouldn't allow, blah blah.... That said, I might be wrong in this case. The recent excuse why he didn't have a website that we could look at was such a classic that I'm beginning to wonder if Earl is some sort of clever parody. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stunsworth Posted November 20, 2009 Share #111 Posted November 20, 2009 ...never any photos to show (or website to look at)... Well Earl _did_ have some photographs taken with the M9 that were dreadful, but when asked to post an example it turned out he'd deleted them all and so couldn't oblige. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mauribix Posted November 20, 2009 Share #112 Posted November 20, 2009 Let's see if Earl is able to make this thread closed too. All of these attacks are becoming boring IMHO. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted November 20, 2009 Share #113 Posted November 20, 2009 . That said, I might be wrong in this case. The recent excuse why he didn't have a website that we could look at was such a classic that I'm beginning to wonder if Earl is some sort of clever parody. It was an interesting excuse - but it still does not explain why an alleged professional photographer cannot be googled at all.... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mauribix Posted November 20, 2009 Share #114 Posted November 20, 2009 Someone in Mountain View must have used the "add to ignore list" function I guess. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
charlesphoto99 Posted November 20, 2009 Share #115 Posted November 20, 2009 Well, like I said it's a job and somebody's got to do it.... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
spersky Posted November 20, 2009 Share #116 Posted November 20, 2009 This guy Earl is such a joke. I ignore him now, My only concern with his idiotic rants is the new people who might come here for real information, and think that he is telling the truth. This forum needs like a credibility rating so people will know who you can trust and who you should ignore. It is obvious he has nothing useful to say about the M9. I think his goal is to get threads closed. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
viramati Posted November 20, 2009 Share #117 Posted November 20, 2009 Best camera ever but it's shame it can't get up in the morning and make the tea. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
plasticman Posted November 20, 2009 Share #118 Posted November 20, 2009 My only concern with his idiotic rants is the new people who might come here for real information, and think that he is telling the truth. This forum needs like a credibility rating so people will know who you can trust and who you should ignore. ...and this from the person who says the M8 is a "dismal" camera (without actually owning one...) How would that affect your rating for "real information" I wonder? Oh well, we're all entitled to our opinions, I suppose. Even a broken record like Earl. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
spersky Posted November 20, 2009 Share #119 Posted November 20, 2009 ...and this from the person who says the M8 is a "dismal" camera (without actually owning one...) How would that affect your rating for "real information" I wonder? Oh well, we're all entitled to our opinions, I suppose. Even a broken record like Earl. Granted, I said it was dismal in a thread I started on the M9. I said it was my opinion based on issue that I listed which I find dismal. Now, to some that might lessen my credibility, especially with people who use the M8. It still does not change my opinion. However, I mentioned that in a thread I started, and I do not feel the need to subject every single thread to a repeat iteration of the dismal comment like Earl does with the M9. Obviously, I feel he is wrong, and I read his reasons, and I disagree. What is hard to tolerate is having to read it in every single thread about the M9. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mauribix Posted November 20, 2009 Share #120 Posted November 20, 2009 Granted, I said it was dismal in a thread I started on the M9. I said it was my opinion based on issue that I listed which I find dismal. Now, to some that might lessen my credibility, especially with people who use the M8. It still does not change my opinion. However, I mentioned that in a thread I started, and I do not feel the need to subject every single thread to a repeat iteration of the dismal comment like Earl does with the M9. Obviously, I feel he is wrong, and I read his reasons, and I disagree. What is hard to tolerate is having to read it in every single thread about the M9. You can use the "ignore list" function. Anyway I don't see the problem for those new forum members readin' complaining words from just a single man (or some, FWIW) It's up to anyone's judgement ,IMHO those who own one of the two cameras have their own point, and it's hard for me think that just those words may change their minds, especially when those minds are supported by direct experience. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.