M9 first impressions from a Canon DSLR user

[Guest imported_torben]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Well, yes. I rarely write "were" instead of "was"

 

I know that English is not your mother tongue!

[Advertisement]

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

[jaapv]

Nor litterate instead of literate...

[Walt Calahan]

Thank you for your frankness.

 

To improve any product this type of discussion is necessary even though it is your first impression. I've always found the first impressions do count.

[Maximus]

Autiocide, thank you for your frank insight into the M9 compared to the 5D MkII.

 

I came from a Canon DSLR background and still have my 1Ds MkIII and quite a few L lenses. Regarding the M9 I cannot disagree with a word you have said. The M9 is an interesting camera to use and Leica glass is superb, but it is flawed and it represents very poor value for money.

 

Of course there are plenty of people including contributors here that achieve very fine results with the M9, as there are with DSLRs. Unfortunately there are also a few M9 users who are prepared to make all manner of excuses for the M9's failings.

 

I see the M9 as a useful tool for certain scenarios, but it isn't a panacea for all. That's why today I have just ordered a new 5D MkII. To have access to both cameras makes a great deal of sense.

[AlanJW]

Your take on the quality of 5Dmkii files vs M9 files is probably not unique but at least on this forum is in a small minority.

 

Since I have and use a 5Dmkii, I can only tell you how I feel. The 5D is a superb camera. I use it when I need to go long (300mm on a Leica RF is a kluge at best), for macro work, and for fast moving children (sometimes autofocus has its pluses; and flash integration is better). But for what I consider my serious work, it is the M9 I pick up, because I just like the look of the images better. This is hard to describe and is entirely subjective. I really don't go by laboratory resolution tests or pictures of charts.

 

If your subjectivity is different and you like the 5D files and don't like the M9 files, I am sure you will have no trouble selling the M9. Patience, in any event, is a good word to use when dealing with rangefinders.

[DennisK]

Autiocide, thank you for your frank insight into the M9 compared to the 5D MkII.

 

I see the M9 as a useful tool for certain scenarios, but it isn't a panacea for all. That's why today I have just ordered a new 5D MkII. To have access to both cameras makes a great deal of sense.

 

I'd have to agree with that 100%. Reading the many euphoric statments regarding the M9 you can easily get the impression, that the M9 is all you'd ever need *if* you are willing to meter yourself, use manualf focus and don't shoot above 135mm. Well, all that was the case for me so I went ahead, got a M9 and sold my 1Ds III. As it turns out, the wideangle aspect of shooting a M camera (below 28mm) isn't it's strong side either (barrel distortion in VFs, parallax error, moustache distortion in WATE, SE18 and Summilux 24, and most importantly the color problems).

 

What the M9 does, it does extremely well, though (shooting manually between 28mm and 90mm in a small convenient package) - which may or may not be reason enough to keep it alongside a second camera capable of troublefree wideangle photography.

[Audiocide]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Patience, in any event, is a good word to use when dealing with rangefinders.

 

It's funny how the first roll of Ilford HP5 I shot with my M7 came out just perfect, but apparently digital -- which is supposed to be much more convenient, is in fact much higher maintenance.

 

Anyway, I'm excited that I'll be taking the M9 out for the first time tonight. That will be the real test of what it can do.

[digitalfx]

Now, I am going to be very frank here, and this might disturb some users here.

 

I do not find the image quality from this camera (uncompressed DNG files) to match my 5D Mark II. Very bright colors tend to get blown out, and highlight detail is noticeably lacking. There are also some strange artifacts with low-light photos, such as clumps of very "pixelated" areas - for lack of a better term.

 

As for the high ISO performance: I knew that it did not match the newest DSLRs, but I did not expect it to be this bad -- not only compared to the low-light monster 5D, but a Canon 350D from 6 years ago. ISO6400 photos from my 5D have a similar noise level to ISO800 shots from the M9.

 

The lenses are a different story. The 35 and the 50 Summicrons really do live up to the hype. Of course they are not magical creatures, but they easily match the best Canon offerings in performance. The miniscule sizes are a tremendous advantage, so I give Leica full marks here.

----------

This is surprising to me, since I fully expected the M9 to blow me away.

 

The build quality, the looks, even the exclusivity factor is fantastic, but it seems to me that Leica still has some refining to do before their image sensors catch up with the big name counterparts.

 

I have been using Canon and Leica cameras for many many years and have had the 5DII since it first released and the M8/M9 since December.

 

Your assessments are not far off, in many ways the 5DII is a superior camera. The sensor is a vast improvement over the older Kodak sensor used in the M9. But as everyone here has pointed out the M9 excels mostly in form/size and in the lenses.

 

I find the Leica lenses noticeably superior than any of my L Canon counterparts, not only in the obvious size difference, but in sharpness which is evident in every print. The other big difference between Leica and Canon L glass is the sharpness wide open, here is where Canon cant even come close. I can use any of my Leica lenses wide open (which is the way I tend to shoot) and know that I will look great. Of course all this comes at a huge price difference as well. I also find a big difference in contrast and colors with Leica glass, this is another area where it cant be compared to Canon. Canon does have the edge in a more versatile lens line up, my Canon 200mm 2.8, 300mm 2.8, macro and Tilt Shift lenses cant be matched on an M9.

 

With the M9, I also seem to spend far less time in Photoshop processing my prints than I do with Canon RAW files.

In the end, I still prefer the M9 despite its weaknesses. It is my constant companion, whereas the 5DII is relegated to special needs.

 

I love the analogy above to driving a stick shift, this is so true. The M9 is like that special car you drive on weekends with the top down. Its the car you look forward to driving all week, its very relaxing and enjoyable. Its a feeling I've never had shooting the 5DII.

[Audiocide]

But as everyone here has pointed out the M9 excels mostly in form/size and in the lenses.

 

I don't disagree. That was the reason I turned to Leica in the first place.

 

The other big difference between Leica and Canon L glass is the sharpness wide open, here is where Canon cant even come close.

 

True. My 35 Summicron ASPH is as sharp wide open as my sharpest L lenses stopped down 2 or 3 stops.

[vanhulsenbeek]

 

Anyway, I'm excited that I'll be taking the M9 out for the first time tonight. That will be the real test of what it can do.

 

But if you go a concert, don't kill the audio

[Logic108]

Well my Canon cameras went like this 40D to 5D to 1Ds MkIII to 5D MKII and I had good glass. But like others here would say that once you use Leica glass then you are hooked. And then having a camera with no AA filter or a weak filter then that's even better. And then having such high quality in such a small package then that's just the top. But of course these are my generalizations and preferences.

[Overgaard]

I totally get what you are saying. But if you flow with that "exclusivity feel" you may get into a Leica M9 workflow where the compactness, silence and the new possibilities make any other camera less workable.

 

dSLR cameras can do stuff the M9 will never do - and the M9 can do things they can never do. Just the fact that you can handhold a Leica M9 down to 1/8 and get good results. With my dSLR I wont go lower than 1/60 or 1/30 if I really need to. That alone takes some of the ISO advantage out of the dSLRs.

 

It's different creature, appealing for different (basic?) ways of doing things.

 

And it will be nice when Leica get into gear and is as forefront on technology as they are on lens design and simplicity.

[Jamie Roberts]

Please remember too, that Canon RAW files and Leica RAW files are very different as well. I don't know what you're using to process your M9 files, but I'd strongly suggest C1 v5 is the way to go for overall image quality (kind of like DPP is if you want the best colour from your 5d2).

 

Also, the meter in the M8 (don't have an M9 yet) is more like a heavy center weighted spot. You need to account for that when shooting; the Ms are typically a bit more (like a third of a stop or more) light sensitive than the Canons, which appear to me to meter a little under (these are my own tests, not DxOs).

 

So it's easy to blow highlights.

 

My m8 at ISO640 records the same light levels as my D3 at ISO 1000. Go figure

 

As for blotchiness or bad ISO noise at moderately high ISOs, I'd have to see that; everything I've seen so far from the M9 looks fine to ISO 1600 (but better at lower ISOs, of course).

[photoshutter]

It's a 50mm f/1.2 lens. It's not very sharp, but it has a very pleasing, unique look.

 

Canon 50mm f/1.2 lens is more to Noctilux look, not to Summilux, I preffer 50L to Lux, but it is much larger, this shot from 50L almost wide open: Picasa Web Albums - R - People

[Double Negative]

I'm a long time Canon SLR/DSLR user as well - bought my M8 about a year and a half ago. Since that time I've shot less and less of the Canon gear. They're obviously two different systems, each with their strengths and weaknesses. That's why I still use both systems.

 

But the M8/M9 are really astonishing cameras. No, their high-ISO performance is relatively weak. The M9 fairs about a stop better than the M8 but it's still nothing to write home about. If low light is your thing, get faster glass... Or shoot film. That aside...

 

I've found the quality of the digital images from the M8 (don't have an M9) to be far, far better than anything my Canon can produce. Admittedly, I have an "old" body - the 1D Mark IIn. The sensor in both is APS-H, or 1.3x (M8 actually 1.33x). The 1D2N is 8.2MP and the M8 10.3MP. So basically, they're kind of close on some levels. What really makes the M images is the sharpness - there's no AA filter blurring the crap out of your images as with the DSLRs. The lenses of course make a huge difference as well; I have a slew of L glass and I have to say, I think the Zeiss ZM and Leica lenses are all as good, if not better in most all cases.

 

Give the M9 a chance. Trust me. Once you get the hang of it, you WILL be impressed. And I say this as a "lowly M8 user."

 

What REALLY is the icing on the cake is the sheer portability of a RF system. My last big trip, I decided to not take my usual Canon arsenal with me, opting for the M8 instead. It was the best decision I've made in a long while! The whole system fit in a tiny, light bag as compared to the shoulder-breaking behemoth that is the Canon kit.

[faraz]

Another Cannon 5dII user here. Please read below (and attached samples) with a grain of salt because I am a total newbie to photography and both these cameras.

 

So, I got the M9 a couple weeks ago and I must say that under normal light and circumstances, I was a bit underwhelmed by the quality of images myself. The white balance, the colors, it is all a bit different (duh?). But, then I got to shoot a concert with both the canon and the M9 and I think I realized what the difference is between the two (I had been telling myself that the mythological anti aliasing filter blurring cannon images is a bogus fiction until then) but was I blown away by the M9 performance or what!

 

The canon had the 85mm L II (f1.2) lens on it and it did wonders at catching some nice shots but the detail and clarity of M9 equipped with a 21mm f1.4 lens was awe inspiring to my non-professional and naive eyes.

 

Here are a couple of shots:

 

Canon:

 

http://photon.parallelmode.com/phoenix/sg-1.JPG

http://photon.parallelmode.com/phoenix/sg-35.JPG

http://photon.parallelmode.com/phoenix/sg-27.JPG

http://photon.parallelmode.com/phoenix/sg-27.JPG

 

M9:

 

http://photon.parallelmode.com/phoenix/phoenix-1.jpg

http://photon.parallelmode.com/phoenix/phoenix-10.jpg

http://photon.parallelmode.com/phoenix/shg-19.jpg

http://photon.parallelmode.com/phoenix/phoenix-21.jpg

 

p.s. Admins, please feel free to convert these links to attachments (the links will be there for another couple days)

[Audiocide]

But, then I got to shoot a concert with both the canon and the M9 and I think I realized what the difference is between the two (I had been telling myself that the mythological anti aliasing filter blurring cannon images is a bogus fiction until then) but was I blown away by the M9 performance or what!

 

The Canon images seem to have a bit of camera shake. Regardless, after shooting with it for a couple more days, the M9 is capable of amazing sharpness. I can't tell if it's the sensor or the lenses (I suspect the latter).

 

I am warming up to the Leica the more I use it -- but it's the form factor, as everyone has been saying. I can take it anywhere, and I do.

 

One thing I've noticed is that the little LCD on the camera is unbelivably crappy. The images tend to look much sharper and less grainy on my computer monitor.

[Audiocide]

Canon 50mm f/1.2 lens is more to Noctilux look, not to Summilux, I preffer 50L to Lux, but it is much larger, this shot from 50L almost wide open: Picasa Web Albums - R - People

 

I own the 50L. I like it for the exaggerated depth of field effects, but I'm not sure I'd compare it to a Leica lens. Especially when it comes to sharpness.

 

Canon makes much sharper lenses, such as the 100 Macro and the 85L.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[Audiocide]

But if you go a concert, don't kill the audio

 

Hehe...

 

That quote in your sig about getting the M9 damp. Have you ever done that, and what was the result?

 

I do use my cameras under a bit of drizzle sometimes, so I want to know if the M9 is especially susceptible to the elements.

[vanhulsenbeek]

Hehe...

 

That quote in your sig about getting the M9 damp. Have you ever done that, and what was the result?

 

I do use my cameras under a bit of drizzle sometimes, so I want to know if the M9 is especially susceptible to the elements.

 

 

Damp........done that?

 

No, not with my M8, and nor with my M9. Yes, with a 2 month old Canon 20D. Some sweat may have mixed in with the condensation (Borneo 2005, Temp 35 C. Hum. 100%). See in picture below what happened with a connector.

 

Took al lot of talking to get a new camera. That was an expensive semi-pro camera at the time and the Netherlands legal position is that appliances should stand up to relatively reasonable use for a reasonable time. My view was that it should be replaced. My dealer and Canon did not like that. Now we are on the best of terms.

 

The M9: I keep in a Ortlieb waterproof camerabag, if the conditions warrant that. See a picture of me, suitably clothed, in the following short video, shot on the Milford Track, New Zealand, in torrential rains last December, The camera was fine in the evening but I did not open the bag all day. And in the evening let it get fully used to dry conditions, with battery and SD-card removed.

 

 

All made with a Pany Waterproof.

 

A lady in the group did open her, already soggy, Lowe Pro bag and then remembered that I told her to remove the battery. She did, and was grateful afterwards.

 

Mind, my views on this subject are, in this Forum, most of the times met with stony silence: evidently something people do not like to read. Residual current when the camera is off - Leica now even concedes it is there - can kill it!

Take care:D , but a bit of drizzle should not hurt. What should be carefully watched are the storage conditions, and even more important, the changes in those conditions.

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!