atufte Posted July 23, 2011 Share #41 Posted July 23, 2011 Advertisement (gone after registration) Yes... There are several on my site: www.alexandertufte.com Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted July 23, 2011 Posted July 23, 2011 Hi atufte, Take a look here Is the M9 a serious Landscape Camera?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
scrubs Posted July 23, 2011 Share #42 Posted July 23, 2011 any more for any more? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SJP Posted July 23, 2011 Share #43 Posted July 23, 2011 This game was done before and it was pretty easy to detect the Leica pictures. Like now. Must have been at least one year ago so not easy to find back in the pile of threads since then. There were about 50 pictures of which an unspecified number were Leica and other/remainder non-leica. Trust me you can see the difference. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bocaburger Posted July 23, 2011 Share #44 Posted July 23, 2011 Viewing those <400KB JPEGs on my $100 Dell 15" LCD monitor I can't see a damn thing that's technically superior to one image over another. So I suppose certain ones of you would say that means I'm a crappy photographer with poor ability to discern. So be it. If you can see a vast difference and can positively attribute it to the camera/lens and no other mitigating factor, then, well, I'm impressed. IMHO what makes the M9 preferable to me over the 5D (and mine's a I not a II) as a landscape camera is its size. Period. In rough terrain where the perfect vantage point for a prime lens isn't always accessible, a zoom lens comes in very handy. Shooting the next-wider focal length on my M9 and then cropping to get the composition I want gets me a smaller, less-enlargeable file, not to mention a different foreground-background spatial relationship. Sometimes while landscape shooting, a want a small detail of a far-off scape, where a 300mm on my 5D would net me a much larger file than a 50% crop from my 135 T-E. Sometimes a great shot calls for macro. Sure, a visoflex would solve both situations, but not without added weight and inconvenience. I'm very practiced at mentally compensating for the 1m-accurate frames, so that's never an issue, but composing a far-off shot in the tiny 90 or 135 frames, even with an eyepiece magnifier, doesn't afford me the kind of scrutiny of detail as the same lens on a reflex. I've had to clone out some litter from M9 tele shots that I would've seen had I been using the 5D. Then there's the issue of graduated filters. Yes, can be dealt with in post, but a lot simpler to slap on a grad when taking the shot (IMHO). Finally (and this doesn't affect me because I have the older MKI 5D) the 5DII has a better LCD for reviewing the details of a landscape shot. So there are myriad issues in addition to simply comparing raw IQ, in deciding what camera is best suited to a particular task. Sometimes the collaboration of those other issues can make the final output from one camera worse than another camera with better native IQ. (Such as when cropping is needed, as I mentioned before). But I'm a firm believer that the best camera is the one I'll take with me to get the shot, not stop halfway up the trail unable to press on to the best view because my camera pack is too heavy, or too bulky that it unbalances me if I need to scramble up a rocky incline. On that basis, the M9 is my landscape camera of choice. Despite it's many shortcomings. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pico Posted July 23, 2011 Share #45 Posted July 23, 2011 [...]There is much more to serious landscape photography and one vital requirement is the ability to get out of bed early enough to be in place at the optimum time. Another is the knowledge and skill to be able to balance and control exposures correctly with graduated nd and nd filters (I deliberately leave the issues of HDR out of this post). Why leave out HDR when it is just as possible with film? And I hate graduated ND filtering, but that's just me. It is so rarely done properly. A Leica M9 would not be my choice for 'serious' landscape photography. It is severely lacking in a number of important areas for this kind of work such as poor battery life, limited iso range and even more limited long exposure capability, not to mention the inconvenience of using graduated filters with a rangefinder camera. Since when did a landscape photographer need high ISO? And a couple spare batteries can fit in a shirt pocket. Long exposures are possible. The 'B' setting behaves like 'T' in traditional shutters using a little trick with the self-timer. By the way, with long exposures, the M9 will shoot a 'black frame' and use it as a hot pixel filter. As a lighter weight and less bulky alternative to cameras that are arguably (and in my opinion) better suited to landscape work, such as the Fuji GSW690111, a Leica M9 might be a reasonable choice for some. An M9 is nothing more, or less, than a camera. With more features than you are apparently aware of. Me, I'd prefer a camera with some movements for scenic work. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
honcho Posted July 23, 2011 Share #46 Posted July 23, 2011 ..... Your post just seemed to have graduated tobacco writen all over it, so thought I ought to mention something you would understand, my mistake. In that case, you may do yourself a favour in future by reading posts more carefully before making incorrect assumptions. As you said, your mistake. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
salim Posted July 23, 2011 Author Share #47 Posted July 23, 2011 Advertisement (gone after registration) WOW. Thanks all for your contribution. After seeing some of the outstanding images here, I am convinced now i can take my leica and coulpe of lens around the world without fearing missing any shots, even the landscape ones. Denior I assume, you use bracketing for exposure, than blending the image later on?. Amazing photos btw Salim Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
denoir Posted July 23, 2011 Share #48 Posted July 23, 2011 Denior, I assume, you use bracketing for exposure, than blending the image later on?. Amazing photos btw Thanks No bracketing, all images are single exposures. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
hoppyman Posted July 23, 2011 Share #49 Posted July 23, 2011 Ask Paul Roark for an opinion (search Golden Trout Workshops). The M9 has become a popular choice there. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
happymac Posted July 24, 2011 Share #50 Posted July 24, 2011 Happymac - lovely shots. Where's #4? Thank you! The picture was taken in Marche/Italy. Open the image with "Preview" and you can directly jump to Google Maps. Ciao Tom 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/157612-is-the-m9-a-serious-landscape-camera/?do=findComment&comment=1743936'>More sharing options...
diogenis Posted July 24, 2011 Share #51 Posted July 24, 2011 Picture #1 to me shows some small amount of CA which leads me to believe #2 is Leica's, without looking at file numbers. But maybe those photos are shot in different times so that #2 looks generally crispier. I would guess that better lenses could make a difference, but I dont really know, just a thought Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
diogenis Posted July 24, 2011 Share #52 Posted July 24, 2011 Picture #1 to me shows some small amount of CA which leads me to believe #2 is Leica's, without looking at file numbers. But maybe those photos are shot in different times so that #2 looks generally crispier. I would guess that better lenses could make a difference, but I dont really know, just a thought Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beyder28 Posted July 24, 2011 Share #53 Posted July 24, 2011 I am just curious what techniques some of you use in post to compensate for not having a filter? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beyder28 Posted July 24, 2011 Share #54 Posted July 24, 2011 I am just curious what techniques some of you use in post to compensate for not having a filter? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
haroldp Posted July 24, 2011 Share #55 Posted July 24, 2011 Of course it is a serious landscape camera. Since landscapes usually do not have regular geometric features, the lack of an AA filter cannot trigger artifacts, and results in sharper images. Leica lenses are great and 18 mp is more than enough for brilliant 24 X 36 prints if well handled in PP. The only possible disadvantage is with an offset viewfinder, it is harder to control juxtaposition of near and far field objects, if that type of composition is what you do. Since I often work near and far field, I find an SLR more convenient, but could get by with my M9 by shifting my eye before shooting. Regards .... H Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
haroldp Posted July 24, 2011 Share #56 Posted July 24, 2011 Of course it is a serious landscape camera. Since landscapes usually do not have regular geometric features, the lack of an AA filter cannot trigger artifacts, and results in sharper images. Leica lenses are great and 18 mp is more than enough for brilliant 24 X 36 prints if well handled in PP. The only possible disadvantage is with an offset viewfinder, it is harder to control juxtaposition of near and far field objects, if that type of composition is what you do. Since I often work near and far field, I find an SLR more convenient, but could get by with my M9 by shifting my eye before shooting. Regards .... H Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest MikeN Posted July 24, 2011 Share #57 Posted July 24, 2011 Whoever saw the world on a ground-glass of a view camera knows that neither a DSLR nor a M9 is a considerable camera for landscape . Deep of field (from nearest to farthest point/Scheimpflug/etc..), for instance, an important feature required for landscape photography. The lack of tilt/shift may perhaps be compensated by DSLR cameras and certain lenses but not by a Leica M. And whoever saw the world on a 4 by 5 inch slide (or better bigger ) on a light table will be convinced that a M9 or DSLR isn't the right camera for landscape A really annoying thing with a M cameras is the unreliable view finder frame. It can't be use for exact compositions - another feature strongly required for landscapes. The handling of filters another point. Usually you'd use pol- and density filters. For the first one you need a special one because you can't look through the lens. Another annoying point is the difference in filter sizes with different lenses. So you'd need adapter, etc... I'm not a fan of Ansel Adams but ones he was asked about which camera would be the best and he answered: "The biggest one you can carry." Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest MikeN Posted July 24, 2011 Share #58 Posted July 24, 2011 Whoever saw the world on a ground-glass of a view camera knows that neither a DSLR nor a M9 is a considerable camera for landscape . Deep of field (from nearest to farthest point/Scheimpflug/etc..), for instance, an important feature required for landscape photography. The lack of tilt/shift may perhaps be compensated by DSLR cameras and certain lenses but not by a Leica M. And whoever saw the world on a 4 by 5 inch slide (or better bigger ) on a light table will be convinced that a M9 or DSLR isn't the right camera for landscape A really annoying thing with a M cameras is the unreliable view finder frame. It can't be use for exact compositions - another feature strongly required for landscapes. The handling of filters another point. Usually you'd use pol- and density filters. For the first one you need a special one because you can't look through the lens. Another annoying point is the difference in filter sizes with different lenses. So you'd need adapter, etc... I'm not a fan of Ansel Adams but ones he was asked about which camera would be the best and he answered: "The biggest one you can carry." Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
denoir Posted July 24, 2011 Share #59 Posted July 24, 2011 I'm so glad there are so many knowledgeable people here to inform us what landscape photography is or isn't. Otherwise we might by accident point our M9s at an clearly inappropriate subject. I've learned so much here like that unless I shoot early in the morning, use ND grad filters and use a camera/lens with tilt capability I'm not really doing landscape photography. Sigh..I guess I'll have to find a way to live with that crushing disappointment. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
denoir Posted July 24, 2011 Share #60 Posted July 24, 2011 I'm so glad there are so many knowledgeable people here to inform us what landscape photography is or isn't. Otherwise we might by accident point our M9s at an clearly inappropriate subject. I've learned so much here like that unless I shoot early in the morning, use ND grad filters and use a camera/lens with tilt capability I'm not really doing landscape photography. Sigh..I guess I'll have to find a way to live with that crushing disappointment. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.