purewire Posted May 10, 2011 Share #1 Posted May 10, 2011 Advertisement (gone after registration) A few weeks ago I purchased the M8.2 at a great price. Resell value on the camera has gone up quite a bit since then. I have also been saving up for a Noctilux while using a CV Nokton f1.1 to hold me over. The weight can be a burden at times but the images are great for what I want to do. Recently I came across a used M9 at a pretty decent price as well. The condition is almost new. If I go with the M9, I will be going for a used Summilux 50mm pre-asph. There are pros and cons to both choices. Noctilux prices are sky high these days. A summilux is an excellent lens that is much easier to carry around but not quite as "magical". What would you do? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted May 10, 2011 Posted May 10, 2011 Hi purewire, Take a look here M8/Noctilux OR M9/Summilux. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
01af Posted May 10, 2011 Share #2 Posted May 10, 2011 That's a no-brainer: M9 + Summilux, of course. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
epand56 Posted May 10, 2011 Share #3 Posted May 10, 2011 A summilux is an excellent lens that is much easier to carry around but not quite as "magical". I find my Summilux 50/1.4 Asph quite magical. And the 35 as well. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
arminw Posted May 10, 2011 Share #4 Posted May 10, 2011 Go for the M9 Summilux !! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
marknorton Posted May 10, 2011 Share #5 Posted May 10, 2011 Yes, but he's looking at the pre-ASPH Summilux which, optically, was an old design and not that great. I would go for the M9 and a 35mm or 50mm Summicron until funds allow you to buy either of the current Summiluxes. Forget the Noctilux, it's a specialist lens which does not by any means have universal application. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jamesk8752 Posted May 11, 2011 Share #6 Posted May 11, 2011 Yes, but he's looking at the pre-ASPH Summilux which, optically, was an old design and not that great. I would go for the M9 and a 35mm or 50mm Summicron until funds allow you to buy either of the current Summiluxes. Forget the Noctilux, it's a specialist lens which does not by any means have universal application. Mark, I think you aren't fair to the pre-ASPH Summilux 50. Yes, the current ASPH is better, but it may be the best 50 in the world. The older lens is still very capable, and it's certainly more available at present. To call it "not that great" is over-exaggeration, IMO - there are many great images out there made by this lens. Regards, Jim Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted May 11, 2011 Share #7 Posted May 11, 2011 Advertisement (gone after registration) M9 and Summilux is a great camera which you can use in at least 80% of all photographic situations. An M8 with a Noctilux? Highly specialised gear to use in special conditions and needs a very skilled photographer to get decent result. No contest:go for the M9 and the Summilux.s Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpattison Posted May 11, 2011 Share #8 Posted May 11, 2011 Agreed, M9 + 50 Summilux pre-asph I have this combo, and it is excellent! John Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
luigi bertolotti Posted May 11, 2011 Share #9 Posted May 11, 2011 Welcome to the forum !!! Not frequent that one gets so convergent opinions on an argument... ... you'll see it if you continue to surf our forum... I join the above suggestions... Lux 50 + M9. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
purewire Posted May 11, 2011 Author Share #10 Posted May 11, 2011 Thanks for the input guys! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramosa Posted May 11, 2011 Share #11 Posted May 11, 2011 Let me differ. I have an M8 and Lux 50 asph--and I lust for a Nocti, not an M9. Of course, what you want should be a function of how you shoot. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
erl Posted May 12, 2011 Share #12 Posted May 12, 2011 I have both the M8 and M9. I also have had a Noctilux for about10 years now. It is a magic lens, but as Jaap has said, it is sort of a specialist lens and needs to be used very 'deliberately.' I lust after the new Summilux 50 ASPH but can't justify such an expense while I have the Noctilux. I would not part with the Noct., but if I did, the Summilux would be an excellent and more versatile replacement. That is the simple fact. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan States Posted May 12, 2011 Share #13 Posted May 12, 2011 A few weeks ago I purchased the M8.2 at a great price. Resell value on the camera has gone up quite a bit since then. I have also been saving up for a Noctilux while using a CV Nokton f1.1 to hold me over. The weight can be a burden at times but the images are great for what I want to do. Recently I came across a used M9 at a pretty decent price as well. The condition is almost new. If I go with the M9, I will be going for a used Summilux 50mm pre-asph. There are pros and cons to both choices. Noctilux prices are sky high these days. A summilux is an excellent lens that is much easier to carry around but not quite as "magical". What would you do? Why would resale value of a camera go up? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jamesk8752 Posted May 13, 2011 Share #14 Posted May 13, 2011 Why would resale value of a camera go up? Happens all the time; a matter of supply and demand. I suspect that nice M8.2 bodies are not all that common now that most of the owners who wanted a M9 have been able to buy one as supplies have increased. The M8.2 remains a very desirable camera and it's a lot cheaper point of entry to the digital M-system than the M9. My opinion only, of course... Regards, Jim Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
glenerrolrd Posted May 14, 2011 Share #15 Posted May 14, 2011 Any comparison is best done with knowledge of the type of photography you enjoy or plan to do with the kit. It also is important to describe the type of light you normally encounter. All the Leica M glass is excellent . It makes a material difference if say you shoot primarily color in bright sunshine verse black and white in overcast or low contrast light. The pre asph 50 lux has its place ..it has uncorrected aberrations that create “some” of the Noctilux glow wide open but when stopped down to 5.6 renders with excellent contrast and color . I use my copy in Florida all winter ...more contrast isnt what I need . The asph version is just great at every F stop. You can argue that the 50 summicron is a better alternative ....it just isn t quite as “old Leica” in its rendering which is just a style preference . While the Noctilux 1.0 can be used as your primary lens ...its handling has limitations. Its large and heavy and has poor balance (head heavy) ...it has a very long throw (required for precise focusing wide open) making it slow to focus ....so much so that a good number of M owners have another smaller 50 . And don t forget shooting at f1.0 requires precise calibration of both the body and the lens ..which has been elusive for many of its users . Get the M9 and buy the best glass you can afford . The Zeiss lenses can be a good alternative if you need to wait on the Leica glass. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jager Posted May 14, 2011 Share #16 Posted May 14, 2011 Another vote for the M9 - albeit I wouldn't necessarily lock down the match with the pre-ASPH 50 Lux. There are other lenses you could consider. A current-issue Cron can be had pretty reasonably, for instance. One other factor to consider when thinking about an M8/Noct combination is that much of the unique signature of the Noct - its natural ~3-stop vignetting around the edges of the frame - is lost because of the crop factor. I vastly prefer the Noct on my M9 (or M7 or M6) than on my M8, for that reason. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Henry Fool Posted May 22, 2011 Share #17 Posted May 22, 2011 Also, with the crop factor on the M8 a lens with an aperture of f/1 at its shallowest depth of field is roughly equivalent to a f/1.4 lens on a full frame sensor. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramosa Posted May 28, 2011 Share #18 Posted May 28, 2011 Also, with the crop factor on the M8 a lens with an aperture of f/1 at its shallowest depth of field is roughly equivalent to a f/1.4 lens on a full frame sensor. This thread has really helped me a lot and pressed me to learn more about how lenses function differently in FF versus cropped lenses. I understood the basics, including that the M8 only uses the center of the lens (while the M9 uses more). But I didn't fully comprehend subtleties such as how the M9 innately exhibits shallower DoF. This is a huge point, especially for how I shoot, and really underscores why my next expenditure needs to be an M9 and not a lens. (Actually, it won't be that simple as, to get an M9, I'd need to sell my M8 and would want to alter my lenses a bit ... likely replacing a 28 with a 35 and an 80 with a 90.) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SJP Posted May 29, 2011 Share #19 Posted May 29, 2011 Although the DoF aspect you mention is roughly OK it is a misconception to claim that the M8 (or any other cropped sensor camera) does not use 'all of the lens'. It does as the image as always constructed by all the light rays entering the lens. If the lens is wide open then you use all the entrance aperture that is available, if you step down in aperture then you use "less of the lens" - often giving slightly improved sharpness and contrast. This holds for all cameras irrespective of M8 or M9. What the effect of the 'M8 crop" boils down to: - no change in light gathering power (f/1 remains f/1 on the M8 as far as light gathering) - the 'equivalent depth of field' is about 1 stop less on the M8 (a f/1 becomes similar to f/1.4 - this is a rather subtle effect and leads to endless discussion as most people do not take the whole image processing train into account) - the 'equivalent focal length' increases from 28 to ca. 40mm, from 50 to ca. 70 mm etc. this effect is noticable but not necessarily bad (50 lux on M8 is a great combination for portraits) - if you crop then you are only using the 'sweet spot' of the image plane, so edge sharpness is better on the M8, as is 'red edge' - this previous point is somewhat counteracted by 'less pixels' on the M8 + the M9 has better high ISO performance. This admittely is an 'executive summary', but should be good enough. Also, I expect a whole pile of comments, contention & critcism to follow this, which is the way it is. Searching on the form will provide further context. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamie Roberts Posted June 1, 2011 Share #20 Posted June 1, 2011 M9 + Summilux or Summicron; forget the M8 and the Nocti, and here's one more reason why (other than that the M9 is the far more capable camera, honestly): The darned IR filters you need to put on the Noct with an M8. Look, if you get a Nocti and you're not going to shoot it in low light with lots of high-contrast point sources, well, then why get a Nocti at all? But if you are, that extra layer of glass required by the M8 to shoot colour is going play havoc with you getting ghost reflections. Exactly the sort of thing you don't want with a Nocti, but you're more susceptible too because of the size of the front element. Anyway, Jaap was right... M9 + 50 = 85% of photographic situations... M8 + Nocti is special purpose for sure. (and having said all that I love my M9 with a Nocti)... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.