The feeling of the M9 vs the M8u

[Rolo]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

You're suffering from different temperature light sources in the same image.

 

Take a mid grey reading at each of the crosses to see the effect and the third is a mixture of both. I've not been precise here, just a quick fix.

 

Twenty seconds to put right on 200 images from the same batch.

 

ps Frank, You demonstrate my point well ...... you can't colour balance an image, but you're pushing for information on the Maestro chip. That will not help you at all, IMO. You need Photoshop/LR training and you'll find much more pleasure in the existing M8 and M9.

 

If you're looking for burst speed and quick file processing, maybe the M8 is not the right machine for you. My Canon will shoot 8 frames a second, auto white balance, auto expose, auto focus and auto track a subject that's travelling at up to 650 mph. My M9 won't do that, but I did shoot 900 shots on Dec 22 without filling the buffer. Courses for horses, as they say.

 

Adjusted images removed at poster's request

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[andybarton]

There is a PS tip with regards to using difference layers etc that allows you to correct any white balance issues with full accuracy. If I remember when I get home, I will have a look for it.

 

This discussion should be in the post production section now.

[Guest BigSplash]

Rolo thanks for the feedback......I actually sent the original untouched deliberately to show the result prior to Photoshop after having properly set white balance manually from the white table cloth. I also wanted to make the point that the camera stalled.

 

I believe that while I know the basics of Lightroom and Photoshop I am self taught and very much still in the learning mode. I do have a version of the corrected image but am sure that it could be improved on further.

 

I am pushing to better understand about the Maestro chip for the simple reason that it will at some point in my view be used within the M10 or M11. I am intrigued what benefits this will yield.

 

Jaapv started this OP by suggesting that the M9 was much better than M8, Subsequently he says that Maestro is super fast and maybe overkill in a M10 (as presumably it will not include AF etc.) .. I ask:

• Why is Leica going to use it at some point? What is the tangible benefit to me as a photographer. if they ditch DSP and go Maestro?
  
• Is it the case that the DSP solution is really good enough now and in the future and the limitation (on continuous shooting and camera stalling) is sensor response time or something else?
  

Jaapv also said colour balance was not an issue its all about M9 having improved rendering, but he does not illustrate what he means by rendering in this context.. Surely this is also going to be effected by the chips set used, and the algorithms / firmware.

 

So that we are clear I have a view that the M8 is after 3 years pretty solid and the M9 is still awaiting a firmware release to correct some known issues.

[thompsonkirk]

Hi, Andy –

 

If you find that PS trick, please put it in a new thread – few will find it here, buried under a thread with this one's title!

 

Kirk

[jaapv]

 

Jaapv said [...] maybe overkill in a M10 (as presumably it will not include AF etc.) .. I ask:

Excuse me? What gave you the notion I said that?

[Guest BigSplash]

Excuse me? What gave you the notion I said that?

 

Jaapv you said:

Originally Posted by BigSplash

So if that is true:

1. Why did Stefan make such a thing about the reason that they did not use the Maestro in the M9. He acknowledged that the emphasis was getting the M9 to market by 09/09/09?
   

 

1. Because the Maestro technology is Leica's jumping-off point for the future. I guess this means M10.
   
2. Because it is a magnitude faster and allows multitasking. The S2 has considerably higher demands for digital processing than the M9, if only because of the amount of data and autofocus. I guess this means Maestro is Overkill for M10
   
3. It would speed an M camera up and allow more overhead for programming. I guess this means that if Leica uses Maestro they will have a superb M10 addressing real life issues. ...or it is overkill if the M9 is so perfect already with the M8 DSP based technology.
   

Jaapv I simply concluded that " Jaapv said [...] maybe overkill in a M10 (as presumably it will not include AF etc.) .

 

Frankly if my conclusion is wrong from what you said ..please let me know what point you were trying to make about the way you think (or know ) about the M9 evolution towards M10 that you expect to happen.

 

I have read your original OP and found it interesting that M9 seems to be significantly better than M8. I have asked for clarification on:

• Colour issues . Your reply suggests that the difference and improvement is about Colour RENDERING...I have now asked you several times what do you mean by this?
  
• I ask about the chip set...and am especially intrigued how M9 can be so different to M8. It has the same DSP, the same basic technology of sensor (others say that is not correct but do not elaborate) and OK a larger buffer memory and different firmware....Is the improvement in rendering purely firmware related?
  
• I ask about white balance against a backdrop that AWB is now superior in the M9 ( and M8 I guess) to the DMR of old and up there with Nikon......I actually do not use AWB but I do use manual WB. For me I ask is the AWB and manual WB so good it cannot be meaningfully improved.
  

Jaapv I read in your postings that all is perfect and cannot be improved.....so I should buy now a M9 (if I can get one). My selfish interest is why not wait for the M10?

[jaapv]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Jaapv you said:

Originally Posted by BigSplash

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

So if that is true:

1. Why did Stefan make such a thing about the reason that they did not use the Maestro in the M9. He acknowledged that the emphasis was getting the M9 to market by 09/09/09?
   

 

1. Because the Maestro technology is Leica's jumping-off point for the future. I guess this means M10.
   
2. Because it is a magnitude faster and allows multitasking. The S2 has considerably higher demands for digital processing than the M9, if only because of the amount of data and autofocus. I guess this means Maestro is Overkill for M10
   
3. It would speed an M camera up and allow more overhead for programming. I guess this means that if Leica uses Maestro they will have a superb M10 addressing real life issues. ...or it is overkill if the M9 is so perfect already with the M8 DSP based technology.
   

Jaapv I simply concluded that " Jaapv said [...] maybe overkill in a M10 (as presumably it will not include AF etc.) .

 

Frankly if my conclusion is wrong from what you said ..please let me know what point you were trying to make about the way you think (or know ) about the M9 evolution towards M10 that you expect to happen.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I have read your original OP and found it interesting that M9 seems to be significantly better than M8. I have asked for clarification on:

• Colour issues . Your reply suggests that the difference and improvement is about Colour RENDERING...I have now asked you several times what do you mean by this?
  
• I ask about the chip set...and am especially intrigued how M9 can be so different to M8. It has the same DSP, the same basic technology of sensor (others say that is not correct but do not elaborate) and OK a larger buffer memory and different firmware....Is the improvement in rendering purely firmware related?
  
• I ask about white balance against a backdrop that AWB is now superior in the M9 ( and M8 I guess) to the DMR of old and up there with Nikon......I actually do not use AWB but I do use manual WB. For me I ask is the AWB and manual WB so good it cannot be meaningfully improved.
  

Jaapv I read in your postings that all is perfect and cannot be improved.....so I should buy now a M9 (if I can get one). My selfish interest is why not wait for the M10?

You are not very good at guessing...Nor at reading, specifically into my posts:mad: This is one of the worst cases of word-twisting I have ever had the displeasure to see on this forum!:mad:

[t024484]

The processing power of the first computer was quite a bit less than the computing power of the chip in a modern washing machine.

The lesson to be learned from this is that you have never too much computing power.

A Maestro in an M camera will bring processing to a new level, like correction of individual pixel properties which will reduce noise, like producing far better Jpeg's, like shooting uncompressed without noticeable delay, etc, etc.

 

The Fact that Jaap has less need for correction of M9 pictures, has mostly to do with the different spectral sensitivity of the new sensor and hardly with the sensor size.

This was another step in improving the camera, by using the latest technilogy.

 

Hans

[jaapv]

That is correct, Hans.

[air]

I had the M8 and switched to M9 just because of one reason...

 

My 90%-lens shall have about 35mm and aperture 1.4

So my choice was M8 + 24lux or M9 + 35lux. Because the M9 was not avaibale 2 months ago I have bought M8/24 and was VERY satiefied with it.

Nevertheless I have switched to M9/35 because my dealer has charged entirely what I have payed for the M8/24-combination.

My feeling was that M9/35 is not "so" much more expensive then M8/24 and might be the better combination for different reasons

 

If the 24lux and 35lux would have the same price - I would still have the M8

 

Michael