dkCambridgeshire Posted December 2, 2009 Share #1 Posted December 2, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) BJP have published Jonathan Eastland's M9 review and it is available online British Journal of Photography - Full Range ... interesting article including opinion about the camera's ergonomics ... and low light ability ... but the low light photo examples are only available in the magazine hard copy. Cheers dunk Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted December 2, 2009 Posted December 2, 2009 Hi dkCambridgeshire, Take a look here Jonathan Eastland's M9 review in BJP. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
bill Posted December 2, 2009 Share #2 Posted December 2, 2009 Thanks Dunk, that's really interesting. A worthwhile read. I am particularly intrigued by the comments about ergonomics - I handled Brian's (Spylaw4) M9 at the recent London get together and was immediately taken by the improved grip and handling. I know the body shape is unchanged from the M8, but the change in body covering makes a huge difference and appears to go quite some way to address one of my key gripes with the unlovely M8. Regards, Bill Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wattsy Posted December 2, 2009 Share #3 Posted December 2, 2009 I guess we can all believe what we want to believe but I own both cameras and there's little difference between the two when it comes to handling and grip. If anything, the M8 covering is actually a bit grippier than the faux vulcanite of the M9. Eastland's 'review' is a very fair one - particularly his comments about how slow it is to check focus and the differences in colour and tonality between M8 and M9. The latter is much more contrasty out of the camera and does indeed more closely resemble reversal film. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marty Posted December 2, 2009 Share #4 Posted December 2, 2009 Fair review, incl. ergonomics. One might not miss a Thumbs-Up at first, but once in use it becomes unmissable. I cannot agree with his misleading claim that JPEG technology has generally become almost as good as RAW; not as long as it is 8 bits! Plus I would argue that RAW handling and processing has improved even more over the last few years... Overall a nice article though. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wattsy Posted December 2, 2009 Share #5 Posted December 2, 2009 I cannot agree with his misleading claim that JPEG technology has generally become almost as good as RAW; not as long as it is 8 bits I would agree with Eastland and I don't think there is anything misleading about the claim. A best quality JPEG (with all the parameters correctly set) from a top end DSLR is, too all practical intents and purposes, as good as what you'll get from the RAW file (assuming that you have got the exposure right). Especially so if you are supplying 8 bit files to agencies or CMYK converted files to a commercial printer. Far too much is made of the difference between 8 bits and 16 bits (usually by the fine art crowd who take photos of moss and rusty drainpipes). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
frank_dernie Posted December 2, 2009 Share #6 Posted December 2, 2009 I would agree with Eastland and I don't think there is anything misleading about the claim. A best quality JPEG (with all the parameters correctly set) from a top end DSLR is, too all practical intents and purposes, as good as what you'll get from the RAW file (assuming that you have got the exposure right). Especially so if you are supplying 8 bit files to agencies or CMYK converted files to a commercial printer. Far too much is made of the difference between 8 bits and 16 bits (usually by the fine art crowd who take photos of moss and rusty drainpipes). I really must check this out again then. When I had my 3.3 megapixel Canon d30 I saw very little difference between in camera jpeg and default raw conversions in PS. After much insistence on the internet that there was an important difference I tried again, this time with a 16+ megapixel EOS 1Ds mk2. This time I saw very significant improvement in detail between the in camera jpeg and a default PS conversion. I have used raw ever since. I will try again to see how things have advanced, now I have the possibility of both M9 and Nikon D3x Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
frank_dernie Posted December 2, 2009 Share #7 Posted December 2, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) I guess we can all believe what we want to believe but I own both cameras and there's little difference between the two when it comes to handling and grip. If anything, the M8 covering is actually a bit grippier than the faux vulcanite of the M9. Eastland's 'review' is a very fair one - particularly his comments about how slow it is to check focus and the differences in colour and tonality between M8 and M9. The latter is much more contrasty out of the camera and does indeed more closely resemble reversal film. I must disagree with you on the grip. I had my M8 slip out of my fingers several times, the M9 not so far, and it feels more secure to me. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bill Posted December 2, 2009 Share #8 Posted December 2, 2009 I guess we can all believe what we want to believe etc. To each their own. If the M8 works for you, great, but I wouldn't use it as a doorstop. One of my three key gripes was the handling. The M9 isn't perfect, but it is, in my humble opinion, a considerable improvement over the "slick brick". Regards, Bill Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff S Posted December 2, 2009 Share #9 Posted December 2, 2009 The M8.2 already "fixed" the covering/grip issue. I haven't done side by side tests, but I think it takes considerably better pics than a doorstop. Don't understand why folks get so testy about small issues, when obviously personal choices vary and, in the end, it's all about the pics and enjoying the process to get there. Just my humble opinion. Jeff Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
brill64 Posted December 2, 2009 Share #10 Posted December 2, 2009 "The latter is much more contrasty out of the camera and does indeed more closely resemble reversal film" i'm so looking forward to this when i finally get one.. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
brill64 Posted December 2, 2009 Share #11 Posted December 2, 2009 ..doorstop 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/105504-jonathan-eastlands-m9-review-in-bjp/?do=findComment&comment=1137848'>More sharing options...
plasticman Posted December 2, 2009 Share #12 Posted December 2, 2009 To each their own. If the M8 works for you, great, but I wouldn't use it as a doorstop. I thought I'd read all the nonsense I ever needed to read about the M8 until I read this... Holy cr@p. The cover was too slippery for Bill, apparently. Oh my god. Seriously. The cover was too slippery. Seriously. Too slippery. Oh my gawd. I really don't know - this apparently contributed to it being "a doorstop" in Bill's "humble" opinion. (I love that "humble") I'm... ah whatever I think I need to take another look at Stefan Rohner's amazing photographs of Morocco in the latest LFI - taken with a doorstop. Sad the camera's not up to Bill's standards, though. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
crbirchenhall Posted December 2, 2009 Share #13 Posted December 2, 2009 BJP have published Jonathan Eastland's M9 review and it is available online British Journal of Photography - Full Range ... interesting article including opinion about the camera's ergonomics ... and low light ability ... but the low light photo examples are only available in the magazine hard copy. Cheers dunk I received my hard copy of BJP this morning. Let's be frank - JE's review is at best cool - I think he prefers the Epson and Panasonic and film Leica Ms. Key issues are the sensor's performance out at the edges and focusing - not to mention price. Anyway his review has reinforced my relunctance to go M9. Chris Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff S Posted December 2, 2009 Share #14 Posted December 2, 2009 I thought I'd read all the nonsense I ever needed to read about the M8 until I read this... Holy cr@p. The cover was too slippery for Bill, apparently. Oh my god. Seriously. The cover was too slippery. Seriously. Too slippery. Oh my gawd. I really don't know - this apparently contributed to it being "a doorstop" in Bill's "humble" opinion. (I love that "humble") Also can't wait to start seeing some threads showing side by side pics from grey versus black M9s. I can only assume that the grey version, given the slicker grip, more closely resembles the doorstop. Jeff Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonoslack Posted December 2, 2009 Share #15 Posted December 2, 2009 I received my hard copy of BJP this morning. Let's be frank - JE's review is at best cool - I think he prefers the Epson and Panasonic and film Leica Ms. Key issues are the sensor's performance out at the edges and focusing - not to mention price. Anyway his review has reinforced my relunctance to go M9. Chris HI Chris I have piles and piles of BJP magazines about the place, and the only thing I can say categorically and absolutely is that to make a buying decision based on what they say is rather like deciding what to watch on television based on the Sun's TV page! The amount of factual errors in BJP is so immense as not to be funny. If you can't focus an M9 - reasonable, but then you can't focus an M7 either! By all means decide you don't want an M9 . . . but per-lease not on the basis of a two page review in BJP. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wattsy Posted December 2, 2009 Share #16 Posted December 2, 2009 I will try again to see how things have advanced, now I have the possibility of both M9 and Nikon D3x I wouldn't get excited about the M9 JPEGs - they are not a great improvement on the M8 JPEGs. The M9, like its predecessor, is a RAW camera if you want to make the most of the lenses and sensor capabilities. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dkCambridgeshire Posted December 2, 2009 Author Share #17 Posted December 2, 2009 I agree wholeheartedly with Jonathan Eastland's comment in his article ' .... bickering about the product is a norrn in the world of Leica' ... Cheers dunk Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wattsy Posted December 2, 2009 Share #18 Posted December 2, 2009 The M9 isn't perfect, but it is, in my humble opinion, a considerable improvement over the "slick brick". Interesting. You don't own either camera but had a feel of the M9 at a get together. I own both cameras and can tell you that there is little difference in handling. The biggest issue with the handling vis-à-vis the traditional film M is not the texture of the covering but the thickness of the body and, as you know, the M9 is exactly the same as the M8 in that regard. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
haroldp Posted December 2, 2009 Share #19 Posted December 2, 2009 Disregarding the inherent IQ debate ( for the moment,) I have several compelling reasons for shooting Raw for both Leica and Nikon (or anything else which can shoot Raw). 1- Since 2/3 is not always the ideal form factor for all compositions, and Leica framing is (of necessity) pretty loose, I often do a final edit of even perfect exposures for cropping. Editing JPEG files and re-saving is always destructive because of its lossy compression. Even if one finds the out of camera JPEG to be indistinguishable from processed raw files. 2- When shooting contrasty subjects or lighting, it is easy to exceed the dynamic range capabilities of a digital sensor. Film was less of an issue, because film's sensitivity is not linear like a photosite. Film is actually more sensitive at the beginning of exposure, and less as it saturates, creating a sensitivity curve that is 'S' shaped. This is why film was less likely to bury shadows or burn highlights. Applying some judicious highlight and shadow recovery in Raw processing comes closer to the film's capability in this regard, but of course will not perfectly emulate it (nor would I want it to). 3- There is no down side to shooting Raw. If time is an issue, than Raw + JPEG is a clear option, ( Paying Leica's price of entry, and worrying about flash memory or disk usage is beyond silly ). For myself, I upload my flashcards, and then run my raw processors in batch on the entire directory, when I have finished my coffee, I have a directory of default processed JPG's and still have my RAWs. All image data comes off of the sensor in RAW format and may later be converted to JPG in the camera. Expecting a camera's processor to execute a process in 1/4 sec. that is equivalent to what a much more powerful computer does in 5-10 seconds is not reasonable, and processing shortcuts are always taken. These differences may be small, and in good conditions almost indistinguishable, but the recurring theme in this forum is always about IQ, hence the endless discussions about various lens attributes and ant-aliasing filters or lack thereof. Those above differences are usually smaller than the difference between in-camera Raw to JPG conversion, and in-computer Raw to JPG conversion. Particularly in Leica's case, who have nothing like a D3x's computing power (4 very hot cpu's), or Nikon's experience. Even in Nikons case, Raw to the computer, then JPG is better under challenging conditions. If one does not shoot under challenging conditions, and only prints 4 X 6 at Walgreen, or screen display's, than both this discussion, (and Leica,) are irrelevant. Regards to All ... Harold Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bo_Lorentzen Posted December 2, 2009 Share #20 Posted December 2, 2009 shaking head - deep sigh and returning to work.. a few more pictures with the M9 before I can go home. Can't we all just get along. . Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.