Another Lamb to the Slaughter....maybe

[GarethC]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

The background. I own a 5D Mark 2 and embraced FF with Canon as soon as the 5D came out. I can't explain why moving from a crop camera to FF was so refreshing but it was.

 

Enter the M8 2 years ago and the refreshing rangefinder experience. I'm wondering if it gets better going FF with the M9.

 

Also, I have always leaned towards wider lenses but 18mm or 21mm seems about the limit for me on the M8 so what would I gain? Or would it just be the ability to see a shot through a lens the way it should be seen? Dunno.

 

Anybody's thoughts on what I'm sure is a well worn topic here would be appreciated. I tried a search but it seems that I can't find any specific threads to read. I may just be conducting too generic a search.

[Advertisement]

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

[erl]

I moved away from slr's years ago, but I did add to to my M analog collection with two M8's. At the time I struggled briefly with the crop factor but did adjust to it comfortably after awhile. With the advent of the M9 I was a "first adopter" and my instant, and continuing , gut feeling is that it is just a more 'natural' feel to the format. I can't quantify it and I reckon it would not be possible, but it is just better, which mirrors your experience with the Canons. Others may express it better, but I suspect my describe experience will be common.

[lars_bergquist]

I too have moved from film M cameras to the M8 and then to the M9. This of course means that I am conditioned to the 'full format', expecting a certain field of view from a 35mm lens, for instance. So to me, the M9 felt more 'natural', and I use no other camera now.

 

But I presume that nowadays, with several smaller sensor formats around in the compact, 4/3 and DSLR worlds, most people would not have these preconceived notions. Most camera users today have no idea what size their sensor is, or even what focal length they are using (it's a zoom of course). They just look through the finder, and if they don't like what they see, zoom!

 

If you don't feel limited by your M8, then there is no reason why you should pine for a M9. The M8 is an

excellent camera in its own right. The detail in its files did beat anything I could do with medium format film. At that time, I had to buy a 18mm Distagon to get a really wide lens -- I did never regard the WATE as a sensible option -- but this need not worry you unless you are into really wide photography. And my mainstay lens with the M8 was the 28mm Summicron.

 

The old man from the Age of the Roll Film Folder

[hoppyman]

Gareth, I'm sure that you are aware of the technical differences in the two cameras so I won't repeat them here.

To comment specifically on your point about the wides you have the equivalent of a 24 and a 28 on your M8. I think that many M8 users (including me) got the 18 and 21 for exactly that. 24 is plenty wide enough for me now that I have moved to the M9 but you do have wider options as you know. The advantage is that you can get faster or smaller lenses to give you those Fields of View once you move to 24x36.

 

For example the very small and superb 28 Summicron ASPH which is both a stop faster and much smaller than the Elmarit 21, if you follow what I am trying to say. Then there are the luxurious new Summilux wides if you have the need and the budget!

 

Importantly your M8 will keep making the same fine photographs as it always has, naturally. Just don't try an M9 or you may find your budget goes into deficit when the inevitable happens Don't worry you may have some time to save up