Guest WPalank Posted February 28, 2010 Share #21 Posted February 28, 2010 Advertisement (gone after registration) Peter, I'm sorry to her about your experience and I feel "beauty surely lies in the eye of the beholder". But my experience using Canon 5D Mark II and 1D Mark III ( I know they aren't Nikons) are the opposite of yours when it comes to PP. I feel the M8 and M9 files are much more "elastic" and resilient as I like to bend and twist the pixels on different layers using different blending modes. Even after working on several layers at 16 bit, I see very little combing (or loss of data) in the histogram. When it comes to a finished print on Fine-Art digital Paper typically 13x19 and 17x22., the leica files are heads above the Canon files Are you sure you are working in 16 bit and not 8 bit? Just a shot in the dark. Again sorry for your experience. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted February 28, 2010 Posted February 28, 2010 Hi Guest WPalank, Take a look here M9 in havana. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
Jerry_R Posted February 28, 2010 Share #22 Posted February 28, 2010 I asked for CV 12mm and 15mm - as I heard very positive opinions from FILM times. Now with M9 they require 1 processing step more - Corner Fix. Didn't you consider them? 12mm will be released in M mount in few weeks. 15mm already is available in this version. I would exclude from discussion about wide angles the crop (M8). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
markowich Posted February 28, 2010 Author Share #23 Posted February 28, 2010 I asked for CV 12mm and 15mm - as I heard very positive opinions from FILM times.Now with M9 they require 1 processing step more - Corner Fix. Didn't you consider them? 12mm will be released in M mount in few weeks. 15mm already is available in this version. I would exclude from discussion about wide angles the crop (M8). i tried the CV 15mm M mount. very red corners, even corner fix did not solve the issue. i am definitely looking forward to the CV 12mm m mount... M8: if a lens gives soft corners on the M8 it will be worse on the M9, p Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
markowich Posted February 28, 2010 Author Share #24 Posted February 28, 2010 oh sure, 16 bit. my main critiscism with M files is that there is already some noise at base iso which gets much worse when you raise shadows.nikon NEFs are much better in that. as far as prints go, D3X amd M9 prints at the same size are almost indistinguishable. slight edge to nikon (and i have seen many in all sizes, up to 1m), p Peter, I'm sorry to her about your experience and I feel "beauty surely lies in the eye of the beholder". But my experience using Canon 5D Mark II and 1D Mark III ( I know they aren't Nikons) are the opposite of yours when it comes to PP. I feel the M8 and M9 files are much more "elastic" and resilient as I like to bend and twist the pixels on different layers using different blending modes. Even after working on several layers at 16 bit, I see very little combing (or loss of data) in the histogram. When it comes to a finished print on Fine-Art digital Paper typically 13x19 and 17x22., the leica files are heads above the Canon files Are you sure you are working in 16 bit and not 8 bit? Just a shot in the dark. Again sorry for your experience. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
markowich Posted February 28, 2010 Author Share #25 Posted February 28, 2010 Do you mind posting some low light shots where the D3 got you where the M9 could not ? it is not that the M9 does not get the low light shot. of course, you can do it with fast glass but the files are so much worse than D3s files for >400 iso. p Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jerry_R Posted February 28, 2010 Share #26 Posted February 28, 2010 you can do it with fast glass but the files What is not solution if we want to have larger DOF on some photos. Then tripod or knowledge how to use flash is solution. Both rarity in Lecia community. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
markowich Posted February 28, 2010 Author Share #27 Posted February 28, 2010 Advertisement (gone after registration) well, some places i have been to a flash might get you just too much attention--)) p What is not solution if we want to have larger DOF on some photos. Then tripod or knowledge how to use flash is solution. Both rarity in Lecia community. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jerry_R Posted February 28, 2010 Share #28 Posted February 28, 2010 Indeed. For ones who hate tripod, there is sth between tripod and monopod - TrekPod XL: Lightweight, Travel Monopod Tripod Combination | TrekPods | Trek-Tech YouTube - trekpod xl Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick Posted February 28, 2010 Share #29 Posted February 28, 2010 Is WATE really so bad? I am asking, as I am interested in that lens, and samples I saw look better than from my old Canon 16-35 L... Jerry, I have the WATE and it is a great lens. It just happens to be Markowich's hobby horse and he loves to beat and ride it into the ground every chance he gets. Go back and read his post history and you can find that he has said this at least half dozen times. Never not a fresh idea to beat the poor WATE every chance he can work it into a post. And, it is a little funny if you follow him here, kind of getting to be a running gag. (Not, that he is wrong about it having some edge distortion, you just need to understand Markowich has expressed his opinion of desiring extremely low distortion in WA lenses.) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
markowich Posted February 28, 2010 Author Share #30 Posted February 28, 2010 Jerry, I have the WATE and it is a great lens. It just happens to be Markowich's hobby horse and he loves to beat and ride it into the ground every chance he gets. Go back and read his post history and you can find that he has said this at least half dozen times. Never not a fresh idea to beat the poor WATE every chance he can work it into a post. And, it is a little funny if you follow him here, kind of getting to be a running gag. (Not, that he is wrong about it having some edge distortion, you just need to understand Markowich has expressed his opinion of desiring extremely low distortion in WA lenses.) true. nothing new under the sun.---))) p Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fotomiguel Posted March 1, 2010 Share #31 Posted March 1, 2010 May be the problem are not cameras or lenses but photography... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
larsv Posted March 1, 2010 Share #32 Posted March 1, 2010 Pse let me know if you want to sell the M9 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
becker Posted March 1, 2010 Share #33 Posted March 1, 2010 Indeed the 18 Elmat has massive cruel distortion its not good in Achrcitecture:o But there schould be 24 mm enough;) But somethings go well in Arch. excuse the bad PP on 18 mm Wonder you dont have the red Problem even not on wet surfaces, side light, situation ? Wish after FM update ist history. Kr MB 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/113946-m9-in-havana/?do=findComment&comment=1243150'>More sharing options...
delander † Posted March 1, 2010 Share #34 Posted March 1, 2010 We all know about the low light capability of recent Nikon 12mp cameras, but I'm sure I read somewhere that they may be going to change the balance more in favour of resolution instead of high iso. Nikon is aware that the direction they have taken has had an impact on resolution, something I noticed immdiately they introduced this technology direction. Jeff Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
diogenis Posted March 1, 2010 Share #35 Posted March 1, 2010 I believe that Leica hit the golden ratio with its sensor: a "FF" sensor but with some Mp for juice. The Nikon with the D3s went just a bit too far, overdid it. On the other hand, they also make D3x. D3 had also 12Mp, so you can say, that the D3s is the evolution of the D3, while D3x will get it's revamp sooner or later. Too many models though Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wattsy Posted March 1, 2010 Share #36 Posted March 1, 2010 None of my business of course but my advice to the OP is that he may want to ask himself why it is that he wants to take photographs. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
markowich Posted March 1, 2010 Author Share #37 Posted March 1, 2010 None of my business of course but my advice to the OP is that he may want to ask himself why it is that he wants to take photographs. because i like it: markowich's Photo Galleries at pbase.com p Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.