Peter H Posted July 4, 2011 Share #121 Posted July 4, 2011 Advertisement (gone after registration) Oh absolutely, completely agree. It's my money Leica is after. Yet it's the development based on those racing drivers comments, based on those hard core pro photographers feedback that moves the product ahead of the competition and enables them, in turn, to demand a premium from the likes of me. Simply through having the best product out there. Agreed, although judging by the succession of Mercedes I've been persuaded to buy over the years, racing drivers must have a growing fancy for ostentatious and inelegant body styling. Especially at the a la carte end of the showroom! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted July 4, 2011 Posted July 4, 2011 Hi Peter H, Take a look here M9 in the Field.. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
Washington Posted July 4, 2011 Share #122 Posted July 4, 2011 To learn the ins,outs,plusses and minuses of this ‘’different’’ machine and just get accustom to using correctly and quickly I put away all my pro-Canon gear and used nothing but the M-9. It was probably three months before I got entirely used to this camera. But no, the camera IS NOT to everyone’s taste Pro or Amateur. It takes some work to get used to…. that’s all. Through my own destructive methods…. accidental and idiotic…. I have found it to be very rugged: believe it or not. Hell, I’d use it anywhere. But not without back-up which I would do with any camera body on an important shoot. Forget that stuff about using a super-dooper top of the line card for the camera… it does’t need it!!! I have been using 16gb SanDisk Extremes with total success ever since the M-9 was made. Good luck. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wda Posted July 4, 2011 Share #123 Posted July 4, 2011 .........A year later, I'm still tempted to drop the money on an M9, but where my heart says yes my head still says no. This doesn't stop me becoming green with envy when I see M9s hanging seductively around colleagues' necks, but I think for me at least I've made the right decision, though of course I reserve the right to change my mind! Justin Griffiths-Williams Justin, your frank and honest appraisal reads like a breath of fresh air. I do hope Leica digest what you you have written. My circumstances are rather different; my projects rarely need a bigger buffer. Short bursts serve my needs when timing is tricky. Precision in a compact package is more important to me at my stage of life. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hausen17 Posted July 5, 2011 Share #124 Posted July 5, 2011 Have to say I really enjoyed reading this thread. Haven't done much work in the last hour, lucky I am self employed. I am in sales and always have been and in sales it is most often not what you say but the way you say it that gets you the result. I feel that Charles complaints are probably very valid for him, especially after a long flight back home, but the way it was represented to the forum, especially first post back on forum, could easily give any fellow M9 owner the thought that he was right which makes the rest of the respondents and M9 owners wrong. Human nature is to strike back. That was never I feel his intention but you have to be responsible for your communications in my view, and as such have to be willing to face the consequences and have no real right to be indignant about those responses. I love my M9, I told the guy who sold it to me just this morning, when he was cleaning my sensor for me, that I still think it was the best purchase I ever made. I am not a pro and never will be, not talented enough. This is my opinion and I paid my money to buy the M9, just as Charles did, but I am the first to admit the flaws, slow buffer, sensor dust, high ISO etc but pros outweigh the cons for me 10 fold. This doesn't make me right and Charles wrong, just right for me. I am sorry that Charles didn't have a good experience with M9 or this forum, but in future a less candid post might get you a more measured well though out responses. David PS. I really loved to post from the Vietnam vet, can't remember the name but it was superb. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
thinkfloyd Posted July 5, 2011 Share #125 Posted July 5, 2011 An interesting thread, read through it all from the beginning in one sitting. As a previous M8 owner (which has even more "quirks" than the M9 - which I intend to get one day), I agree with all sides that have posted. How it is not a professional tool, how it can become a professional tool, how it is not perfect, how it is perfect, etc... I guess it all boils down to user experience, and how they feel about shooting their M's. I used mine professionally to shoot weddings and pet portraits, not as action packed as a war zone, but still pretty difficult situations for an M. And I had more keepers with my M than my DSLR. And as a personal tool, I used to always bring mine everyday. When I sold mine, I noticed I wasn't shooting as much anymore, and that makes me depressed (really. Been diagnosed with clinical depression), so now I am eyeing on an M9 and maybe a single 50mm so I can go back to shooting again (as soon as I can afford it, which by my estimate, would take me 5 years of religious saving). I tried with my DSLR with pancakes (I use Pentax), but it does not inspire me as much as the M's. Even my professional gigs have slumped since I sold mine due to my lack of interest. Sorry for the long rant. In all, I just want to say - to each his own. Don't mind the people who hate it, and the people who love it. Just do what you feel is right for you. That said, I wish I had the same problems as you guys with the M9. Sold my M incl. all lenses to fund my daughter's education... no regrets though. But I do miss it a lot. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
chris_tribble Posted July 5, 2011 Share #126 Posted July 5, 2011 Sincere best wishes for recovery. Maybe your daughter will be able to get you an M10 when she graduates and gets that great job Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
colonel Posted July 5, 2011 Share #127 Posted July 5, 2011 Advertisement (gone after registration) How it is not a professional tool, how it can become a professional tool, Sold my M incl. all lenses to fund my daughter's education... no regrets though. But I do miss it a lot. I will have to correct all comments like this. Plenty of pros use it. All because one pro doesn't like it, who apparently did no research before buying on its applicability to his shooting style ........ Best of luck to your daughter .. wishing you a speedy return to M club! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
thrid Posted July 5, 2011 Share #128 Posted July 5, 2011 First time I heard that. Leica thinks they changed the frames in the M8, not in the M6. M3/M3/M4/M5/M4-2/ some M4-P/MP3 - Frame lines indicate coverage focused at 1 meter M6/M6ttl/M7/MP - Frame lines indicate coverage focused at .7 meter (70cm) M8 - Not sure, but they are incredibly inaccurate. I think it is .7 with the 1.33 multiplier worked in there somehow. Very strange. M8.2 - Frame lines indicate coverage focused at 2 meter. Very nice, unless you do a lot of closeup portrait work below 2m. M9 - Frame lines indicate coverage focused at 1 meter. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Indina Posted July 5, 2011 Share #129 Posted July 5, 2011 I don't really understand, why so many postings engage in such emotional depths over this topic. To me it sounds as if a defect camera has been sold. It's a shame that it happens, but quite normal too - unfortunately. It's up to Leica to fix it, and to the frustrated owner to decide, whether to give the repaired version a second try. Greetings from Hamburg Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ho_co Posted July 5, 2011 Share #130 Posted July 5, 2011 thrid, as I said above, what you're saying is contrary to what Leica claims. Can you cite a source for your data? According to everything I've seen, the framelines of the M6, M6TTL, M7 all have the standard 1.0 m setting of the earlier cameras and the M9. The M8 was the camera that caused the ruckus, because it changed to the closest focal distance of 0.7 m. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
thrid Posted July 5, 2011 Share #131 Posted July 5, 2011 thrid, as I said above, what you're saying is contrary to what Leica claims. Can you cite a source for your data? According to everything I've seen, the framelines of the M6, M6TTL, M7 all have the standard 1.0 m setting of the earlier cameras and the M9. The M8 was the camera that caused the ruckus, because it changed to the closest focal distance of 0.7 m. Sources: Don Goldberg (DAG), Sherry Krauter (Golden Touch), Gerry Smith (Kindermann), Leica sales reps., countless photographers, 13 years of shooting with M2/M4/M4-2/M6ttl/M7 in addition to having shot, but not owned M4-P/MP/MP3/M8/M8.2/M9. I'm not sure what cameras you own, but it is pretty obvious when you compare something like an M4 to the M6. Pre M6 bodies are 1 meter (late M4-P with M6 RF units are top plates are .7). M6 and newer are .7, except for the MP3, which apparently is 1 meter. The original M8 was undetermidable, the M8.2 should be 2m and the M9 1 meter. There is a video somewhere with Mr. Daniels being interviewed by Sean Reid I think and they discus the whole frame line fiasco with the original M8, then the change to 2m with the M8.2 and now the M9 with 1 meter. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ho_co Posted July 6, 2011 Share #132 Posted July 6, 2011 So, no specifics, just generalities as usual. Thanks for the reply. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
thrid Posted July 6, 2011 Share #133 Posted July 6, 2011 So, no specifics, just generalities as usual. Thanks for the reply. Generalities? Stefan Daniel is the M9 project manager for Leica and I believe he currently is the world wide division leader for M products. He has worked for Leica for several decades. In the 70 minute video interview he explains and discusses this very issue in detail. So, that is a clarification from the very man who lead the team, who designed the very camera you are talking about. You can't get a more first hand answer. You have more than 7000 posts to your name, so I am surprised you did not see it, when it was linked to on this very site. Regardless this has been discussed ad nauseum on this and other boards around the web. You could do a search and see for yourself. Or email someone like Don at DAG. Or even better take a look in to the operators manual. It's right there in black and white. Here's another tid bit. Ever notice how until around the time of the introduction of the M6, 50'smm lenses from Leica did not focus closer than 1 meter (Summicron DR excluded)? Just something to think about... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pico Posted July 6, 2011 Share #134 Posted July 6, 2011 Are any of the metric fanatics suffering from frame line accuracy? Really? I seriously doubt their work is diminished by the precision of the frame lines. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ho_co Posted July 6, 2011 Share #135 Posted July 6, 2011 Don and I worked for Leica at the same time. The post-DR 50's that focused closer than 1 m were available during the life of the M4 and the M5; they didn't appear with the M6. I think you're referring to Michael Reichmann's LuLa video. If so, you might want to re-watch it. As I said, generalities. Not worth the bother. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
thinkfloyd Posted July 6, 2011 Share #136 Posted July 6, 2011 @chris_tribble: Thanks... I hope she does @colonel: I was referring to the many comments that were posted, some claiming its not for pros, others say it is, etc... personally, I used mine professionally Didn't care about its quirks, but instead worked around them. Yep, I hope to be able to get back into the fold within the year if all things go as planned... fingers crossed! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
thrid Posted July 6, 2011 Share #137 Posted July 6, 2011 Don and I worked for Leica at the same time. The post-DR 50's that focused closer than 1 m were available during the life of the M4 and the M5; they didn't appear with the M6. I think you're referring to Michael Reichmann's LuLa video. If so, you might want to re-watch it. As I said, generalities. Not worth the bother. Whatever. I really don't care if you agree or not, but those are the facts. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
adan Posted July 6, 2011 Share #138 Posted July 6, 2011 On the slightly off-topic of Howard and thrid: Actually, MY experience, which covers most of the M bodies, is that Leica changed the framelines with the M4-P, in order to squeeze 28mm lines into a window designed for a 35mm FoV. Comparing an M4-2 and M4-P (otherwise identical cameras two years apart from the same Midland Canada factory) the M4-P clearly has slightly smaller 35 and 50mm "boxes" in the viewfinder (about 1.5 frameline thicknesses). The 90mm lines also changed in configuration between these two cameras (the M4-2 is like the M2 and M4 - an eight-segment box with corner "Ls" - which were reduced to four lines, in the M4-P et seq., that no longer define the corners. A side note - I doubt Leica has ever optimized ALL the framelines for 1 meter or .7 meter, since the 135 lenses only focus down to 1.5 meters. At most, they may have used the "minimum focus limit" for any particular focal length (.7 meters for 28-50, .7 or .75 meters for 75mm, 1 meter for 90mm, and 1.5 meters for 135). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
plasticman Posted July 6, 2011 Share #139 Posted July 6, 2011 The original M8 was undetermidable... There is a video somewhere with Mr. Daniels being interviewed by Sean Reid I think and they discus the whole frame line fiasco with the original M8, then the change to 2m with the M8.2 and now the M9 with 1 meter. Aren't you overplaying this a little bit? The framelines were altered to .7m in the M8, and it seems to me that a lot of fuss was simply because this was not what people were accustomed to. Once one becomes accustomed, or alternatively if one comes to the M8 without a mass of mental baggage from previous years of using film Ms, then there's no particular problem in training the eye to use these framelines, especially when a glance at the screen will show the user how far s/he needs to compensate (while still in the 'training' stage). Must say I get tired of the ritual knocking of what is a perfectly good digital camera. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
colonel Posted July 6, 2011 Share #140 Posted July 6, 2011 Guys, if you learn whats going you can compensate In any event, I predict in 1 or 2 generations the Leica M will have electronically generated framelines in the viewfinder which will also react to focus distance. When that happens loads of people will complain that the camera has lost feeling Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.