AlanJW Posted November 23, 2009 Share #21 Posted November 23, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) I still have my slide rule from my early adventure into architecture. I must say using the slide ruler with the M9 is much easier than having to adjust everything by 1.33 on the M8. This shows that my personal circle of confusion is growing larger as I grow older. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted November 23, 2009 Posted November 23, 2009 Hi AlanJW, Take a look here My go at first M9 impressions. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
Rolo Posted November 23, 2009 Share #22 Posted November 23, 2009 Peter, we got side tracked from your experience by the Cocs and need to get back to your text. I took a view of your images and you did well on your first outing. The skin tones are indeed well handled. Good to hear that your favourite lens is back o the camera. I can see a couple of soft images, but generally you are spot-on. Not sure that WB is really an issue. I'm setting WB manually nowadays and using Auto WB very little. Was the 100% review really a pain? Does it affect the flow ? I don't check every image, but the screen is useful and I like to take a look before moving on to another location. Be good to have a button, or spin the dial the other way, setting to instantly go straight to 100% rather than twiddling through the range. Thanks for sharing, Peter. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
innerimager Posted November 23, 2009 Author Share #23 Posted November 23, 2009 Hi Rolo- Thanks for looking and I'm glad you liked the images. I've been grinning at the coc exchange, well worth the tangent. ;>) I agree the WB is a very minor issue as using custom is easy enough, but one likes all functions to be up to the last model at least, and I think the current M8 auto WB is more accurate then the M9. I doubt it will stay that way. As to 100% view, using compressed DNG it wasn't really a flow stopper. I like the way the compressed files look. I don't know if I'd see a difference with uncompressed, maybe others can comment. But checking 100% view on uncompressed files would be out of the question in the flow of a job. On the other hand, I found myself chimping less with the M9 because it was slower than I am used to. I decided to pretend I was shooting film, and break the habit of looking at too many shots, which may break the flow of shooting much more than waiting for the image! I kind of liked the experience. I do agree that having an instant 100% view would be great, the Nikon's have something like that. best...Peter Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted November 23, 2009 Share #24 Posted November 23, 2009 In my experience the main advantage of using uncompressed files is that they are more robust in postprocessing. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ho_co Posted November 24, 2009 Share #25 Posted November 24, 2009 ... tape measure to subject's eyes (careful not to get the nose instead) ... Not to be too anal about this, but remember when our cameras had film plane marks so we knew where to measure from? But now that we've got a superbly picky digital system, Dear Old Leica has tossed our measuring base mark. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
innerimager Posted November 24, 2009 Author Share #26 Posted November 24, 2009 Back to my focus impressions. I've been putting the M9 through a torture test using my 75/1.4 wide open at nearest focusing distance and more with the 50/1.4 wide open and I'm very happy with the results. I hate to admit it but I think I had an eyeglass problem when I shot the event which was corrected.....by carefully cleaning the darn glasses! best...Peter Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bo_Lorentzen Posted November 24, 2009 Share #27 Posted November 24, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) Peter, Glad to hear the problem is fixed, would have been terrible if you were to be the first to get a M9 harder to focus than the M8. ;-) . Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
innerimager Posted November 24, 2009 Author Share #28 Posted November 24, 2009 Thanks Bo, I feel a bit sheepish, but very happy to say critical focusing with the M9 is looking really good! here's an example of what I've been doing tonight, 75/1.4 @1.4 from nearest focus distance. I've bee getting this kind of result quickly and repeatedly. I love the 75 lux, it lives on my 0.85 M7 but rarely got used on the M8, both because of 100mm fov, but also it was tough to nail wide open. I'm a happy puppy. best....Peter Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
diogenis Posted November 24, 2009 Share #29 Posted November 24, 2009 I am a bit confused by this idea of a shallower depth of field on the m9 to m8. No, we have said already: DoF of an M9 is larger, due to the fact that sensor is larger and CoC is also larger I would have thought the DOF was identical. No. Dof of M9 > Dof of M8 therefore M9 has more things in zoom in its zone => easier focus in practice at least in theory. Now in practice and Dof of cm. you still need to focus carefully Edit: Obviously all that has little to do in real life photographing, but in general and after you have shot 1000s of photos, you get less chances of out of focus photos with an M9. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
yanidel Posted November 24, 2009 Share #30 Posted November 24, 2009 No, we have said already: DoF of an M9 is larger, due to the fact that sensor is larger and CoC is also larger No. Dof of M9 > Dof of M8 therefore M9 has more things in zoom in its zone => easier focus in practice at least in theory. Now in practice and Dof of cm. you still need to focus carefully Edit: Obviously all that has little to do in real life photographing, but in general and after --you have shot 1000s of photos, you get less chances of out of focus photos with an M9. On that recurring subject, you are right and wrong. #1 Same lens, same distance to subject : Dof is thinner on M8 but Fov will be different (a 35mm lens will give a 46mm Fov on M8) #2 Same lens, same Fov : Dof is thinner on M9 as you will have to reduce your distance to subject for an equivalent Fov. IMO, #2 is what is important in comparisons between M9 and M8 as I don't think people change the way they frame (Fov) because of a change of camera. More probable is that they change their lenses to keep their standard Fov. In this case, for 35mm FF equivalent on both cameras and assuming a distance to subject of 3 meters, you get the following : - 28mm Cron at F2 on M8 : Dof = 1.08m - 35mm Cron at F2 on M9 : Dof = 0.89m (0.62m at with Lux F1.4) Therefore, M9 has thinner Dof for a given Fov. This gives more selective focus capability for fast wide angles and is the main reason why I bought the M9 and use it with a 35mm F1.4 lens. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Ash Posted November 24, 2009 Share #31 Posted November 24, 2009 I am of the opinion that the conclusion of #1 is right only if you consider same printing size. Otherise DoF is the same for same lens same distance as the image "does not know" that part of it has not been projected on a sensor. If you print the M9 image and crop it to M8 size the image will be the same as if you print out the M8 image to that size. Regards Steve On that recurring subject, you are right and wrong. #1 Same lens, same distance to subject : Dof is thinner on M8 but Fov will be different (a 35mm lens will give a 46mm Fov on M8) QUOTE] Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted November 24, 2009 Share #32 Posted November 24, 2009 Same lens, same subject distance = same DOF, different FOV Different lens, same subject distance = different DOF, same FOV, same perspective Same lens, different subject distance = different DOF, same FOV, different perspective. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rolo Posted November 24, 2009 Share #33 Posted November 24, 2009 I feel a bit sheepish, but very happy to say critical focusing with the M9 is looking really good! Thanks for sharing the truth, Peter. Panic had stepped in. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
yanidel Posted November 24, 2009 Share #34 Posted November 24, 2009 I don't know where these claims that the M9 is easier to focus come from (maybe a psychological factor ?). I don't find it easier to focus, it just about the same as the M8, yet wide open with the 35mm 1.4 and close to the subject, it is challenging due to very thin DOF. Much more than with the 28mm Cron at F2 on the M8 anyways. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted November 24, 2009 Share #35 Posted November 24, 2009 I don't know where these claims that the M9 is easier to focus come from (maybe a psychological factor ?). I don't find it easier to focus, it just about the same as the M8, yet wide open with the 35mm 1.4 and close to the subject, it is challenging due to very thin DOF. Much more than with the 28mm Cron at F2 on the M8 anyways. Or maybe easier than the Noctilux @ 0.95 @ 1m on either camera? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
luigi bertolotti Posted November 24, 2009 Share #36 Posted November 24, 2009 I don't know where these claims that the M9 is easier to focus come from (maybe a psychological factor ?). I don't find it easier to focus, it just about the same as the M8, yet wide open with the 35mm 1.4 and close to the subject, it is challenging due to very thin DOF. Much more than with the 28mm Cron at F2 on the M8 anyways. Personally, my impression that M9 is easier to focus had nothing to do with DOF (on which I hope not ANOTHER long discussion to arise... ) : simply when I handled one into a shop, focusing indoor subjects (rather low light) I quickly had the feel that the alignement of RF was "better - clearer" than M8 (the lens was a "normal" one... seem to remember a Cron 35 or 50... nothing to do with focus throw); there was not a presumptive bias... they were the first days after announcement... I hadn't yet red about... but repeat that it was a precise feeling... I thought it was something in the RF glasses' hues... "OKARO effect" or so... But has been, till now, my only real life experience with M9.... not yet bought... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ho_co Posted November 25, 2009 Share #37 Posted November 25, 2009 ... DOF (on which I hope not ANOTHER long discussion to arise... ) ... Amen, amen, amen! Let it be so, oh Lord, let it be so! Remember, you DoF believers, behavior of the 35 Summilux ASPH on the M8 (and other posts on other sites) showed that the traditional depth-of-field computations don't hold with digital. As Luigi said, there have been dozens of discussions on the topic here. As Sean said, don't look at hand-me-down equations, but be your own judge. As I said, .... Well, you know what I said. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
diogenis Posted November 25, 2009 Share #38 Posted November 25, 2009 On that recurring subject, you are right and wrong. #1 Same lens, same distance to subject : Dof is thinner on M8 but Fov will be different (a 35mm lens will give a 46mm Fov on M8) #2 Same lens, same Fov : Dof is thinner on M9 as you will have to reduce your distance to subject for an equivalent Fov. I am not sure we can deduct results this way. If you change the distance you change DoF. Fundamentally however, M8 has a shallower DoF when compared to a FF camera, provided you keep all the rest the same: same lenses, same aperture, same distance to subject. Because, you can easily change lenses, distances or Aperture, but you can't change the sensor. IMO, #2 is what is important in comparisons between M9 and M8 as I don't think people change the way they frame (Fov) because of a change of camera. More probable is that they change their lenses to keep their standard Fov. In this case, for 35mm FF equivalent on both cameras and assuming a distance to subject of 3 meters, you get the following : - 28mm Cron at F2 on M8 : Dof = 1.08m - 35mm Cron at F2 on M9 : Dof = 0.89m (0.62m at with Lux F1.4) We are losing perspective here. Once someone buys the M9, the M8 goes into the bag as is the best case. Usually most will place the old M8 in the cupboard (I know I will). In short, when you are out shooting, you might close to your subject, move a bit away change aperture or not, and these are the easy things you can change. Many times you wont even change the lens as you might not carry a second or third lens with you. So, why should we care about dof between the two cameras? Therefore, M9 has thinner Dof for a given Fov. This gives more selective focus capability for fast wide angles and is the main reason why I bought the M9 and use it with a 35mm F1.4 lens. I don't understand your reasons for buying the M9 here. For example: I would love to buy an M9 -if it existed - to be able to fully use my lenses edge-to-edge, which become wider. And with that I would have a quieter shutter among other things Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
yanidel Posted November 25, 2009 Share #39 Posted November 25, 2009 I am not sure we can deduct results this way. If you change the distance you change DoF. Fundamentally however, M8 has a shallower DoF when compared to a FF camera, provided you keep all the rest the same: same lenses, same aperture, same distance to subject. Because, you can easily change lenses, distances or Aperture, but you can't change the sensor. We are losing perspective here. Once someone buys the M9, the M8 goes into the bag as is the best case. Usually most will place the old M8 in the cupboard (I know I will). In short, when you are out shooting, you might close to your subject, move a bit away change aperture or not, and these are the easy things you can change. Many times you wont even change the lens as you might not carry a second or third lens with you. So, why should we care about dof between the two cameras? I don't understand your reasons for buying the M9 here. For example: I would love to buy an M9 -if it existed - to be able to fully use my lenses edge-to-edge, which become wider. And with that I would have a quieter shutter among other things All I was saying is that for a given Fov, the Dof will be thinner on the M9 than on the M8 (which answered your opposite statement) because you need to get closer to retain the same Fov. Closer with longer lenses = less thin Dof. Perspective is impacted as stated par Jaap, I fully agree. As for my reason to buy the M9, I shoot 80% wide-open 2-5 meters from subject. M9+35 Lux Asph is perfect for that. The M8 alternative was M8+28mm Cron which was disappointing or M8+24mm which was amazingly good but too slow and with extensive Dof. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
diogenis Posted November 25, 2009 Share #40 Posted November 25, 2009 Ok, if you want to retain FoV and come closer to the subject, then indeed you get less dof: distance is important. Edit: but you can also get the same effect with a 50lux as well, provided you move couple meters away from the subject Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.