Guest malland Posted December 6, 2009 Share #1 Posted December 6, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) I've had an M9 for a week now and have noticed the following issues — have you found the same thing? 1. Exposure: the exposure meter works somewhat differently and underexposes a bit compared to that of the M8. Also, while I've had no exposure problems with 35mm and 50mm lenses, I find it more difficult with to expose using the 28mm and, particularly, the 21mm lens. 2. Formatting (firmware v1.002: formatting an 8BB card, and even a 4GB card, takes an inordinately long time. 3. Writing DNG files (uncompressed): sometimes takes very long: when the battery was down to 20-25%, writing a single file took a long time and stopped me from taking an additional picture, making me lose shot opportunities several times. —Mitch/Pranburi Flickr: Mitch Alland's Photostream Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted December 6, 2009 Posted December 6, 2009 Hi Guest malland, Take a look here M9 Possible Issues?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
el.nino Posted December 6, 2009 Share #2 Posted December 6, 2009 1. Exposure: the exposure meter works somewhat differently and underexposes a bit compared to that of the M8. Also, while I've had no exposure problems with 35mm and 50mm lenses, I find it more difficult with to expose using the 28mm and, particularly, the 21mm lens. think about it and you'll find out the reason. hint: angle of view. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wattsy Posted December 6, 2009 Share #3 Posted December 6, 2009 The different metering pattern of the M9 has been written about a lot since its introduction, as has the formatting speed (or lack of it). I'm not sure the former could be described as an issue - it is just a matter of getting used to the way the meter evaluates exposure in a scene. It's far more of a spot-like meter than you might be expecting - hence your issue with wide angle lenses. I've never found the slow writing time of uncompressed DNGs to stop me from taking another shot. That sounds like something worth looking into. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest malland Posted December 6, 2009 Share #4 Posted December 6, 2009 The different metering pattern of the M9 has been written about a lot since its introduction, as has the formatting speed (or lack of it). I'm not sure the former could be described as an issue - it is just a matter of getting used to the way the meter evaluates exposure in a scene. It's far more of a spot-like meter than you might be expecting - hence your issue with wide angle lenses...Thanks. I'm used to the M6 and M8 meters, neither of which caused any difficulty. How, exactly does the metering pattern differ from the M6 meter? —Mitch/Pranburi Flickr: Mitch Alland's Photostream Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wattsy Posted December 6, 2009 Share #5 Posted December 6, 2009 Thanks. I'm used to the M6 and M8 meters, neither of which caused any difficulty. How, exactly does the metering pattern differ from the M6 meter? It doesn't really differ that much (at least not as much as the M8 differs). Obviously the M6 metering area is a clearly defined large spot but the M9 metering area (though it looks like rectangular) is supposedly designed to more closely resemble that 'large spot'. Maybe the exposure latitude of neg film came into play when you were using your M6? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lars_bergquist Posted December 6, 2009 Share #6 Posted December 6, 2009 The metering pattern of the M9 (and the M8) looks like a panoramic fat sausage with a length from end to end of about 2/3 of the picture's longer dimension. So, as with the M6, the actual angle of acceptance is a function of the angle of view of the lens mounted, because it is always a fixed proportion of it. The cut-off outside the pattern is pretty steep. I agree that while with the M8, exposure was somewhat liberal so that 'ISO 360' was actually closer to 400, and I had a minus 1/3 correction permanently set, that of the M9 is really on the spot. I did never shoot slide film in my M6TTL, so the meter could have been off quite a bit without me ever noticing it. I am quite wary of direct comparative tests of meters; meter paranoia is a complaint with no known cure but death. The old man from the Age of Selenium Meters Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ario Arioldi Posted December 6, 2009 Share #7 Posted December 6, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) The metering pattern of the M9 is larger and more cicular (or less elliptical) compared with the one in the M8. Because of this, using wide angle lenses in scenes dominated by a large portion of bright sky I found a certain tendency to underxpose. Cheers, Ario Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shootist Posted December 6, 2009 Share #8 Posted December 6, 2009 Yes Mitch the M9 has some issues. Metering: It is different then the M8. As to your noticed differences with wide angle lenses that could be 2 fold. One with a WA lens the meter spot is seeing more of the scene picking up on brighter and or darker areas, depending on what is in the background, of the scene compared to what your true subject is causing the meter to either under or over expose the true subject. Two the WA lenses protrude farther into the body which could be covering the meter cell a little causing it to overexpose (you didn't mention if you are getting over or under exposed images with WA lenses compared to longer lenses). It really baffles me why Leica hasn't released a new firmware correcting the formatting and write times of the M9. It's now been 3 months from release and probably 8+ months since the camera saw the light of day and still these problems persist. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest malland Posted December 6, 2009 Share #9 Posted December 6, 2009 Shootist, I think you're right because I'm getting underexposure with the wide angle lenses. —Mitch/Pranburi Flickr: Mitch Alland's Photostream Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnbuckley Posted December 6, 2009 Share #10 Posted December 6, 2009 Mitch - I don't know how you use exposure compensation, but whereas with the M8 I kept a more or less permanent -1/3rd bias, I learned with the M9 to have no exposure comp at all. Yes, everything seems just a little bit underexposed compared to the M8, but removing the negative exposure comp helps. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest malland Posted December 6, 2009 Share #11 Posted December 6, 2009 John, I use manual exposure and the issue is with the 28mm and 21mm lenses only, and seems to be for the reasons explained in a couple of the responses above. —Mitch/Pranburi Flickr: Mitch Alland's Photostream Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
arthury Posted December 6, 2009 Share #12 Posted December 6, 2009 [...] It really baffles me why Leica hasn't released a new firmware correcting the formatting and write times of the M9. It's now been 3 months from release and probably 8+ months since the camera saw the light of day and still these problems persist. The reason being there're so many waiting lists for this broken camera and Leica is really really busy keep pace with all that money waiting to be picked up. So why bother with fixing it when one can grab the dough first. I cannot blame Leica for it but I do blame the people in the waiting lists for their $7K sacrificial offering just to get in line for this incomplete and less than perfect camera. If the waiting lists disappear, then the issues will be a reality. For now, the dough is blinding the eyes of Leica and they see NOTHING. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
charlesphoto99 Posted December 6, 2009 Share #13 Posted December 6, 2009 The reason being there're so many waiting lists for this broken camera and Leica is really really busy keep pace with all that money waiting to be picked up. So why bother with fixing it when one can grab the dough first. I cannot blame Leica for it but I do blame the people in the waiting lists for their $7K sacrificial offering just to get in line for this incomplete and less than perfect camera. If the waiting lists disappear, then the issues will be a reality. For now, the dough is blinding the eyes of Leica and they see NOTHING. I suspect that Leica are working overtime on a FW fix and don't want to release an incomplete fix but rather do it all in one go. For things like lens correction they have to go through lens by lens and write code. Might be the same with trying to optimize cards. I'd rather wait a bit and get a true fix then a partial. Why all the hate btw? It's not a "broken" camera by any means. If it didn't take pictures with image quality that blows Canon/Nikon out of the water in a classic compact package then there wouldn't be waiting lists. All I can say is "baa baa baa..." (I'm a very happy sacrificial lamb) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
george_b Posted December 6, 2009 Share #14 Posted December 6, 2009 The reason being there're so many waiting lists for this broken camera and Leica is really really busy keep pace with all that money waiting to be picked up. So why bother with fixing it when one can grab the dough first. I cannot blame Leica for it but I do blame the people in the waiting lists for their $7K sacrificial offering just to get in line for this incomplete and less than perfect camera. If the waiting lists disappear, then the issues will be a reality. For now, the dough is blinding the eyes of Leica and they see NOTHING. Have you got an M9 so you can speak with personal experience? No one made you / or will make you buy one. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.