DFV Posted January 9, 2010 Author Share #41 Posted January 9, 2010 Advertisement (gone after registration) What I miss most on an M9 is my two hands. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted January 9, 2010 Posted January 9, 2010 Hi DFV, Take a look here Things I miss on my M9. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
Rolo Posted January 9, 2010 Share #42 Posted January 9, 2010 "Delete all" only deletes unprotected images, Rolo. Just look on it this way: we are depending on electronics all the way - why be fearful of one small aspect that has never ever failed yet, and trust all others that have no more than a 99.99% track record? Massive risk Jaap for what I do. I'm nervous at not having a second card, never mind deleting a 16 gig day's shoot with the press of a couple of buttons. In fact, that reminds me Jaap of that other menu item I'd remove in a Manchester heart beat - Delete All ! Ended up on it once in my rush. Some want different coloured bodies so tey know which one to pick up .... Ha ! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted January 9, 2010 Share #43 Posted January 9, 2010 Well, Rolo, I can fully understand that. Minimizing risk for professional purposes is very wise... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
adan Posted January 9, 2010 Share #44 Posted January 9, 2010 One "thing" I do miss on my M9 - 10-12 Mpixel files. For a lot of my work, 18 Mpixels is overkill. What I'd really like is an M9H with 12 Mpixels and ISO 12,500 - alongside my M9 classic. A downsampled "sDNG" format like the Canon 5DII has (gives 11 Mpixel raw files from a 21 Mpixel sensor) would be useful as a firmware option for the M9, but I expect it would eat up processor power and take longer to write than a DNG + JPEG does now. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted January 10, 2010 Share #45 Posted January 10, 2010 As far as I am concerned I could be much more malicious. Somehow I don't doubt it:rolleyes: Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
anupmc Posted January 10, 2010 Share #46 Posted January 10, 2010 You are very right to say that the market is wise, however I see a lot of complaints here. Much more than I had anticipated especially from M9 owners. I am glad you are happy with your M9 as you should be. Me, I am happy it exist so I can keep shooting with an M yet on the whole I am simply disappointed at something that I had high hopes for. Help me to understand this please... How did you not know about the M9's missing features before you bought it? You had high hopes that the M9 would have an LCD ontop but now that you've bought it, it doesn't? Huh?!. I can understand disappointment if the camera keeps breaking down or has poor battery life during use or something, but why would anyone be disappointed with what they knew they would get in the first place? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted January 10, 2010 Share #47 Posted January 10, 2010 Advertisement (gone after registration) One "thing" I do miss on my M9 - 10-12 Mpixel files. For a lot of my work, 18 Mpixels is overkill. What I'd really like is an M9H with 12 Mpixels and ISO 12,500 - alongside my M9 classic. A downsampled "sDNG" format like the Canon 5DII has (gives 11 Mpixel raw files from a 21 Mpixel sensor) would be useful as a firmware option for the M9, but I expect it would eat up processor power and take longer to write than a DNG + JPEG does now. Pixel binning? The same idea occurred to me. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrc Posted January 10, 2010 Share #48 Posted January 10, 2010 I had fully planned to buy an M9 in addition to the M8, but because I was one of the very early adopters of the M8, and got a bad one (eventually replaced by Leica, for which I am grateful) I decided to wait a few months, until the problems shook out. Three months would have been enough -- say, Christmas -- but now I won't be able to get one for another few months, it looks like. It really seems to me that the main change has been to FF, which wasn't that important to me. I don't have a problem with the fact that it was important to some people, but it wasn't to me. When I read in a number of places that the image-quality improvement, while there, is marginal, my feet begin to grow cold -- $8,000 is a lot for marginal improvement. Also, since I was planning to use the M8 as a backup, I'd be juggling filters, equivalence ratios, etc. What should be simple becomes not. I tend to agree with critics that the upgrade should have been sharper, particularly in terms of the sensor. Nikon and Canon offer good performance at 6400, and some performance even faster than that; this has nothing to do with DSLRs vs. rangefinders, or anything like that...it's more like being told that Leicas can only be used with ASA 25 film while other cameras can use everything up to Tri-X. It's simply a handicap. In short, I've still got the urge to buy an M9, but I may be able to resist it. JC Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
James R Posted January 10, 2010 Share #49 Posted January 10, 2010 T ...From the reactions here I can see that there will be either an M9.2 or M10 much sooner than even Leica might think. Personally I believe they have done a very poor and disappointing job on the M9... The M9 is not appealing to me at all. I put it next to my Leica IIIf and I weep... You draw that conclusion from a handful of criticism? Sounds more like an attempt to undergird a personal opinion. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
likalar Posted January 10, 2010 Share #50 Posted January 10, 2010 Okay, I really like this camera; after using it casually for 3 weeks now (to get to know it a bit), I'm very happy, and I bet many others are too. I don't seem to miss much at all. Sure, I've got old film M habits that will be hard to break, but this camera is much better than I am. Would I change anything about it, if given the chance? Sure, but that's not my call. Great job, Leica! Larry P.S. Leica, what's up with eliminating the bottom plate rounded "ear" that hooked onto the body peg? This thin slot design is too fussy. Bring back the ear! ;-) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
adan Posted January 10, 2010 Share #51 Posted January 10, 2010 Jaap: There must be some technical difference between "pixel binning" as PhaseOne does it Sensor Plus Review - which cuts resolution by 75%, and what Canon does, which cuts total pixels by only 50%. I think "pixel-binning" technically refers only to the 1/4-sized files produced at the sensor-read stage (requiring a special sensor), and that what Canon is doing is a different form of downsampling of the files further down the line - but could be wrong. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
DFV Posted January 10, 2010 Author Share #52 Posted January 10, 2010 Help me to understand this please... How did you not know about the M9's missing features before you bought it? You had high hopes that the M9 would have an LCD ontop but now that you've bought it, it doesn't? Huh?!. I can understand disappointment if the camera keeps breaking down or has poor battery life during use or something, but why would anyone be disappointed with what they knew they would get in the first place? I was well aware off all the things missing before I ordered it (even before 9/9/9) and already was not happy about them. Yet I though that the winnings would undoubtedly compensate for the losses. Right now the scale is slightly towards better because of the fullframe sensor. The problem is that at this price point in should be much more towards "better". As I mentioned before my main focus is on getting my Elmarit 21 back with the fullframe sensor. Ideal would have been to simply ad that and remove nothing from the M8.2. But I guess you can't have everything. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
DFV Posted January 10, 2010 Author Share #53 Posted January 10, 2010 Somehow I don't doubt it:rolleyes: Oh yes, beleve me I could. But then I would REALLY be malicious. In any case I am willing to take back all these "malicious" statements and write a public letter of apology if Leica where not to introduce* an M9.2 or M10 within the next... Hmmm, let's say 18 months. Is that OK with you? * Upgrades on the current M9 not included. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andym911 Posted January 10, 2010 Share #54 Posted January 10, 2010 Andy, you are just not going to see it at a 950 x 600 JEPG on here. I think the people who are really seeing the benefit to the maximum, are those who are printing to A2. I see it when I do a significant crop. If for example you compare usage of the MATE. On the M9 you really do get a 28mm wide angle and at the other end if you take at 50mm, you can crop to 1.3 and still get the effect of a 67mm as per M8. Wilson Wilson guess you have a point there..thanks for commenting. Maybe put differently....when printing up to A3 do you see any difference in quality or what I am really after...do the M9 files look like the M8 files....I really like the 'look' of the M8 files when printed...very subjective I know but maybe someone can chip in? cheers andy Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wattsy Posted January 10, 2010 Share #55 Posted January 10, 2010 do the M9 files look like the M8 files....I really like the 'look' of the M8 files when printed...very subjective I know but maybe someone can chip in? I have both cameras (though my M9 is on its way back to Solms to have the RF calibrated properly - plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose) and would offer the following opinion. The 'default' M9 files are quite different to 'default' M8 files. It could be argued that the M9 files are richer, more film-like, etc. but this isn't really anything that couldn't be replicated with a bit of curve tweaking. The downside to this default 'look' is that the M9 seems to have even less highlight shoulder than the M8. I've previously described M9 files as being curiously more film-like and more digital-like at the same time and I still believe that. At a pixel level (for what it's worth) the M8 sensor is sharper - I guess Leica were not lying when they made claims about the trade-off between IR cover glass thickness and sharpness. As suggested elsewhere in this thread, the real benefits come from the full frame coverage of the sensor and the extra cropping ability that the 18MP provide. If you shoot much with the sun or other bright light sources in the frame, being able to shoot without filters is also a real boon. Others (e.g. Jaap) talk about extra file robustness, blah blah, but I haven't seen any evidence yet where a decently exposed M9 file has held together during post processing in a way that a similarly exposed M8 file wouldn't. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jerry_R Posted January 16, 2010 Share #56 Posted January 16, 2010 From my perspective - for critical sharpness, wide apertures or longer focals - there should be LV present, showing magnified part of frame. You could also forget then about front or back focus forever. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted January 16, 2010 Share #57 Posted January 16, 2010 Why don't you buy a camera that provides live-view then? This is like going onto Sandvik forum and insisting that they add a screwdriver function to their hammers. The point being that most, if not all, rangefinder users have bought their camera just because it has rangefinder focussing. That means that it is slightly absurd to add other focussing systems. That area is covered by other cameras. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jerry_R Posted January 16, 2010 Share #58 Posted January 16, 2010 Why don't you buy a camera that provides live-view then? I have already - u43. That area is covered by other cameras. You are wrong. No, u43 isn't Full Frame. We have two digital worlds (I do not count compacts): - one big and heavy systems like Canon, Nikon, Sony, Pentax using mirror - 2nd - small and light, no mirror - u43 and rangefinders I used to have 5D II. I no more want to carry heavy bag with me. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
scc Posted January 16, 2010 Share #59 Posted January 16, 2010 I think a magnified Live View would be a handy thing to have, and you wouldn't necessarily need to use it. For critical focus, it can be excellent. I use it often on my GH1 with manual focus lenses, and it really is excellent. Jaapv, I think your comment "Why don't you buy a camera that provides live-view then?" is a bit silly. You could use that argument for any area of a camera that could be improved. eg "Why don't you buy a camera that formats the card quickly then?" or "Why don't you buy a camera that has a quality LCD screen then?". The M9 is far from a perfect camera, though I admit, I love it. The best improvements to the M9, IMO, are those which, to purists, would not be detrimental to external appearance or usability of the camera. Live view is one of those features - don't like it? Turn it off. Whether or not it is feasible to implement is another topic altogether. As for the idea that most M users bought into the system because it has rangefinder focussing, I disagree. I bought into the system because of Leica's outstanding range of great lenses, and because of the compact system size. I DO like rangefinder focussing, but it is not a perfect system (and neither is TTL necessarily). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted January 16, 2010 Share #60 Posted January 16, 2010 Point being: Slow formatting is not a design choice, nor a characteristic of a rangefinder camera. Changing the character of the M series would be the most stupid thing Leica could ever do. If you want a FF EVF camera, Panasonic is the firm to turn to and ask to make it, not Leica. The R-solution is supposed to be such a thing, maybe if it ever comes it will be labelled Leica. This thead gives me a feeling of deja-vue. We have ploughed through this at least twice for hundreds of posts. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.