James R Posted November 17, 2009 Share #41 Posted November 17, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) I shoot Nikon, so, I expected delays. I'm certain delays shakes out the weak buyers and it is pretty common for people to be on 2 or more lists. The longer they wait, the more lists they join. This isn't Leica's first rodeo, so, I'm certain nothing will be a surprise, short of a major M9 flaw similar to Canon's 1D3 focusing problems. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted November 17, 2009 Posted November 17, 2009 Hi James R, Take a look here Interest in M9 weakening?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
thrice Posted November 17, 2009 Share #42 Posted November 17, 2009 Btw, I love the 'Rising Phoenix' shot in your gallery!! Graham, Thanks for taking the time to check it out That's one of the oldest shots I keep in that gallery, was a case of F/8 and be there (or swerve off the main road and run from the car as quickly as possible). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
plasticman Posted November 17, 2009 Share #43 Posted November 17, 2009 There seems to be huge animosity against the M9 by people with an M8. I cannot explain it. I don't think this is true, at all. I'd say that some M8 users are tired of new and possibly over-enthusiastic M9 owners telling them that the new camera "blows the M8 out of the water" or something similar, without being able to show any images that are worthy of the claim. Much has been said of M8 owners "raining on M9 owner's parade". Apparently to do the reverse is totally okay. I wish the M9 well - Leica's survival probably depends on its success - but I'm yet to see the pictorial evidence of its supposed overwhelming superiority to the earlier camera. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andybarton Posted November 17, 2009 Share #44 Posted November 17, 2009 I've not noticed that either. I've also not noticed many M9 shots in the Photo section, either. I'd like to see a lot more - there must be plenty taken by M9 users by now - why aren't they being shown? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted November 17, 2009 Share #45 Posted November 17, 2009 I don't think this is true, at all. I'd say that some M8 users are tired of new and possibly over-enthusiastic M9 owners telling them that the new camera "blows the M8 out of the water" or something similar, without being able to show any images that are worthy of the claim. Much has been said of M8 owners "raining on M9 owner's parade". Apparently to do the reverse is totally okay. I wish the M9 well - Leica's survival probably depends on its success - but I'm yet to see the pictorial evidence of its supposed overwhelming superiority to the earlier camera. There is no "overwhelming superiority",Mani. How could there be with the M8 still an amazing camera? But the fact remains that the total package is a nicer camera by a fair margin. I will pick it up over my M8. The advantages in image quality are mostly visible in print, so not something that would "jump at you" from the computer screen. Except for the very real advance in high-ISO of course. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
plasticman Posted November 17, 2009 Share #46 Posted November 17, 2009 There is no "overwhelming superiority",Mani. How could there be with the M8 still an amazing camera? But the fact remains that the total package is a nicer camera by a fair margin. I will pick it up over my M8. The advantages in image quality are mostly visible in print, so not something that would "jump at you" from the computer screen. Except for the very real advance in high-ISO of course. Jaap - I agree that full-frame in itself is a very great improvement in many ways, and I expect to see that in prints, when I get the opportunity. I wish, however, that Leica had not (for my taste, that is) 'thrown the baby out with the bath-water' when they reconfigured the sensor and internal processing to deal with noise and to beef-up color. Noise for me is pretty much a non-issue, and the changes are in my opinion detrimental to the overall look of the image. I said the images looked like they'd undergone some sort of internal processing when I tested the camera, and this was universally denied on the forum - but it seems I was right. I'm looking forward to the next iteration instead - I'm sure my name will be after yours' on the waiting list. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted November 17, 2009 Share #47 Posted November 17, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) The internal processing is only some noise at 2500 that can be better dealt with before RAW writing than in post - that is what MJH Michael wrote elsewhere. In practice, I think there is very little image deterioration going on, even at 2500 A very large part of the improvement is simply because the sensor is larger=less enlargement=less noise visible. I don't know how you judged the M9 you tried- but I found the LCD shows nothing near the real look and sharpness of the images; The M8 LCD is much more true in that respect. I nearly deleted a number of images thinking they were soft Once on the computer screen the shots looked spectacularly better than one thought when shooting, let alone in print. It really is a step up. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leitzmac Posted November 17, 2009 Share #48 Posted November 17, 2009 I wasn't on a list, however I did discuss the M9 with my dealer and I had been making provision to buy one. He suggested (very selflessly I thought) that I pick one up whilst I was on a shoot in the States because it should work out cheaper, however due to reasons some have outlined above (mainly nourishing a solid relationship) I said I would go with him. Now, having heard various users' views on the M9 I realise it is probably not quite there yet (for my needs) and I look forward to seeing what's 'round the corner - even if it takes some time I think Leica are a hair's breadth from creating the camera I hoped the M9 would be. That's just for me personally, I can see there are a lot of people who are delighted with the camera and many more who are still dying to get their hands on one so I think I'm probably in the minority! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
delander † Posted November 17, 2009 Share #49 Posted November 17, 2009 If interest is really weakening in the M9 just think about the S2 scenario. Or to be really mischevious perhaps Leica are dribbling the M9 out of the door because the service department could not handle the volume of expected returns:D Jeff Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted November 17, 2009 Share #50 Posted November 17, 2009 I wasn't on a list, however I did discuss the M9 with my dealer and I had been making provision to buy one. He suggested (very selflessly I thought) that I pick one up whilst I was on a shoot in the States because it should work out cheaper, however due to reasons some have outlined above (mainly nourishing a solid relationship) I said I would go with him. Now, having heard various users' views on the M9 I realise it is probably not quite there yet (for my needs) and I look forward to seeing what's 'round the corner - even if it takes some time I think Leica are a hair's breadth from creating the camera I hoped the M9 would be. That's just for me personally, I can see there are a lot of people who are delighted with the camera and many more who are still dying to get their hands on one so I think I'm probably in the minority! I do not think any camera Leica (or any other manufacturer for that matter) will build in the future will be "quite there". For my needs - it will take a hefty leap in image quality results (rather unlikely, as we would need a new set of physics and biological laws for that imo) I cannot see any significant improvement that Leica can make to create anything but an uninteresting diminishing return. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wattsy Posted November 17, 2009 Share #51 Posted November 17, 2009 as we would need a new set of physics and biological laws for that imo) I cannot see any significant improvement that Leica can make to create anything but an uninteresting diminishing return. I'm sure you said a similar thing earlier this year when questions were asked about a full frame M digital replacement for the M8 - "impossible due to laws of physics,etc." Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted November 17, 2009 Share #52 Posted November 17, 2009 No, actually I didn't. I knew Leica was working on it. The speed with which it came surprised me, though. If you look back through my posts, you'll find several predictions for January 2010 - which was an adjustment of my 2007 notion that it would be late 2012, to be honest. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest EarlBurrellPhoto Posted November 17, 2009 Share #53 Posted November 17, 2009 I cannot see any significant improvement that Leica can make to create anything but an uninteresting diminishing return. Riiiiight. Anyone believe you won't have your name on a pre-order list as soon as the first news of an impending M9 replacement is let leak, before any specs are known? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted November 17, 2009 Share #54 Posted November 17, 2009 You mean the M9-2, with sapphire LCD cover, top round LCD and slightly more effective IR filter due to improved coatings.?Oh yes- and a bright chrome finish At a mere 7500 Euro? I didn't go for the M8-2 either, nor the S2, nor the X-1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stunsworth Posted November 17, 2009 Share #55 Posted November 17, 2009 "impossible due to laws of physics,etc." The problem lay with the technology, not the science. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted November 17, 2009 Share #56 Posted November 17, 2009 That is quite correct, Steve. The same goes for the IR filtering, for all the cause being rooted in physics. However, the sensor noise thing for instance goes back to quantum physics, and the number of photons striking the photosite/pixel. There is not much technology can do there, except invent smarter and smarter digital noise reduction tricks. The same for resolution. Diffraction creates a natural limit to resolution and nothing we can do there. Maybe things like plasma lenses would be a solution, but things like that are far in the future, if at all. There are two different schools here. One believes in the unhindered progress of technology, exponential even, others think that at some point a plateau will be reached. The problem of course is to notice one has indeed reached that palteau.... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest EarlBurrellPhoto Posted November 17, 2009 Share #57 Posted November 17, 2009 You mean the M9-2, with sapphire LCD cover, top round LCD and slightly more effective IR filter due to improved coatings.?Oh yes- and a bright chrome finish At a mere 7500 Euro? I didn't go for the M8-2 either, nor the S2, nor the X-1 Am I mistaken or did I read in one of your posts that you have an "M8U"? That's tantamount to getting an M8.2 IMHO. True, it's missing "S" mode, but I don't take you for a poseur...just a hedonist Agree with you on the S2 and X-1. Out of at least a hundred pros I know, not one of them has any interest in the S2. I hope for Leica's sake that's atypical. The X-1 flabbergasts me. Why anyone would prefer it over a second-hand M8, I don't get. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonoslack Posted November 17, 2009 Share #58 Posted November 17, 2009 Out of at least a hundred pros I know, not one of them has any interest in the S2. That's a lot of pros to know Earl . . . . incidentally, I was looking for your website . . . but maybe you login name is a nod to our Kenny? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
smgorsch Posted November 17, 2009 Share #59 Posted November 17, 2009 I was interested to read this in the current issue of "The Economist" about the resurrection of a luxury swiss watch maker & it immediately made me wonder about Leica: ------ "Hublot’s success stems in part from Mr Biver’s penchant for rationing his products. He was careful to restrict supply when business was booming, delivering only seven watches, say, when ten were ordered. Jewellers pay cash for stock, so it seems foolish not to sell as many watches as possible. Yet for Mr Biver it is an essential strategy. “You only desire what you cannot get,” he says. “People want exclusivity, so you must always keep the customer hungry and frustrated.”" Stefan Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
plasticman Posted November 17, 2009 Share #60 Posted November 17, 2009 The internal processing is only some noise at 2500 that can be better dealt with before RAW writing than in post - that is what MJH Michael wrote elsewhere. As far as I know, the processing is supposedly limited to "higher ISOs" - not exclusively 2500. I thought I could see some sort of processing at much lower ISOs - all I can say to justify that statement, is that I made it before the processing was a known fact. I don't know how you judged the M9 you tried- but I found the LCD shows nothing near the real look and sharpness of the images; The M8 LCD is much more true in that respect. I nearly deleted a number of images thinking they were soft Once on the computer screen the shots looked spectacularly better than one thought when shooting, let alone in print. It really is a step up. Well, in assessing a $7k purchase, I thought I'd do a little more than chimp the LCD. Anyway, not to belabor the whole subject all over again, I did as much testing as I could side-by-side with the same lens on the M8 and the M9, shooting indoors and outdoors and saving all the images to the same card (which afterwards confused the M8 less than I thought it would, incidentally). One thing that I kept to myself until the flaw became well-known, was that the M9 locked-up on me in use (I did mention this in a PM to another member of the forum at the time). Don't get me wrong, I still want a full-frame M. However, to my eyes, the M9 didn't render the look of the lenses in the special way I was hoping - which, as you've guessed, is the way they render on film. Your mileage appears definitely to vary. And so everyone is happy. I'm looking forward to what Leica can do when time constraints and the accountant's knife is not at their throats. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.