Jump to content

Is the M9 a serious Landscape Camera?


salim

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I asked about polarizing filters first then mentioned the difficulty with grads as there was no holder for these lenses. So I don't understand your comments other than trying some one-upsmanship. ;)

 

OK, you mentioned grads, I said you could do as good a job using a bracket sequence and blending them in post processing. It was a helpful suggestion, but you see it as one-upmanship???? There really is no helping some blinkered people :rolleyes:

 

 

Steve

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 166
  • Created
  • Last Reply

In response to the original question. I have just spent two weeks in the Lofoten Islands in Norway with a Leica M9 (various lenses) and a Phase One P40+ (35mm and 105-210mm, tripod, cable release). The Leica consistently produced shots that were more pleasing than the Phase One, ie. as sharp, better contrast, whilst being much lighter and easier to use. It is an excellent landscape (and most other uses) camera.

Link to post
Share on other sites

In response to the original question. I have just spent two weeks in the Lofoten Islands in Norway with a Leica M9 (various lenses) and a Phase One P40+ (35mm and 105-210mm, tripod, cable release). The Leica consistently produced shots that were more pleasing than the Phase One, ie. as sharp, better contrast, whilst being much lighter and easier to use. It is an excellent landscape (and most other uses) camera.

 

Amen to that! Could not agree more!

 

Best Regards,

 

Claus

Link to post
Share on other sites

I was wanting to get a little more in camera correct. I don't believe the bracketing takes the reflections off the leaves, etc. I may be wrong, and please correct me if I am.

 

Only if the leaves are very still. I've done some dreadful scenic stitched panoramics because leaves and limbs moved. :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Please use the photo-thread "landscape and travel" for images. There you can display them instead of linking. These forums are meant for technical etc. discussions, of course you can illustrate your posts, but they are not meant for display and photo-critique.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Luka, excellent work and thank you for sharing. We have been contemplating an RV trip through the national parks for quite some time and your collection sealed the deal. I was surprised to see how useful the 90mm was on your trip and I'm glad I just ordered one!

 

Thanks,

-dan

 

Different lenses, very different images. CCD sensor vs CMOS sensor, latitude in the highlights (5D2) vs latitude in the shadows (M9) and the list goes on.

 

Two very different tools. The M9 is lighter and more convenient which is a blessing when hiking while the 5DII allows for accurate framing (TTL, live view).

 

I just returned from a three week long trip touring the national parks in the US southwest and brought both cameras. I ended up using the M9 for 95% of my photos. You can see some of them here and judge if the M9 is a "serious" landscape camera:

 

Part 1: Overview

Part 2: Grand Teton & Yellowstone

Part 3: Mesa Verde, Arches & Canyonlands

Part 4: Monument Valley, Grand Canyon, Antelope Canyon & Horseshoe bend

Part 5: Zion, Death Valley & Yosemite

 

I was in fact so happy with the performance of the M9 and unhappy with the weight of the 5DII that when I got home I immediately ordered a NEX-C3 to be used as a backup for the M9 (I don't expect to use it). The 5DII will stay at home for my next trip.

Link to post
Share on other sites

About the main limitation to the M9 as a landscape camera (in my opninion) is that I find myself changing lenses a lot in uncontrolled environments. All then lens changes tend to allow the sensor to accumulate dust. My routine is to check a few images with lots of sky taken late in the day on my laptop. I then clean the sensor if I find too many annoying spots.

One days accumulation of spots is easily taken care of in my standard image processing. My comparison is with my Canon 5D Mark II with a 24-105mm L zoom. If the environment is completely incompatible with the M9 (example Hoh rain forest in Olympic National Park in the rain) then I revert to the better weather sealed Canon with the general purpose zoom lens instead of the M9 and my set of primes.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I like to use my M 9 for landscapes, the quality of the pics is excellent. If there are bad weather conditions, I prefer my well rain protected 1 D IV together with sealed lenses. But to achieve similar quality as with the M 9 I have to use prime lenses too. Even my L Zooms do not deliver the same quality. Therefore I have to change either the lenses in case of need or to use the zooms and to live with not so perfect quality.

And in case of very bad weather conditions with heavy rain and wind plus sand I have to go one or more steps downward and to use my fully weather and water sealed Panasonic FT 3 - but this is of course an exception, when otherwise pics are not possible without danger for the other equipment and when I am fishing and taking pics at the same time myself. But my favorite equipment for landscape is the M 9, simply because the equipment is very light and the quality of pics excellent.

Link to post
Share on other sites

..........................................

And in case of very bad weather conditions with heavy rain and wind plus sand I have to go one or more steps downward and to use my fully weather and water sealed Panasonic FT 3 - but this is of course an exception, when otherwise pics are not possible without danger for the other equipment and when I am fishing and taking pics at the same time myself. But my favorite equipment for landscape is the M 9, simply because the equipment is very light and the quality of pics excellent.

 

+1, also for the thumbs-up for the Pana FT. We have the FT1 and FT2, and although the results are not Leica quality - of course, with such a small sensor - they are not bad at all, and shine in the water: some very recent pictures here (Leica Lenses, so OK :) ) snorkelling with the FT2 and the FT1 in a housing for scuba Zenfolio | Sander van Hulsenbeek Photography | North Indonesia 2011

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guess I'd have to say it depends.

 

Tend to use my SLRs (egad!) for landscape work--Think they can handle weather and water, dust etc, better. Also prefer the more precise framing and the extra versatility zoom lenses provide, rather than having to carry a bagful of lenses, and repeatedly change 'en out as the situation demands.....

 

Use the Ms pretty much as my "people shooters"--street, candid, and a lot of music photography. That's where the small size and quietness of a M comes into play--not to mention the ability to focus in "available darkness."

 

Guess you could say I play to each type of camera's strengths....

Link to post
Share on other sites

Lately, I use my M9 mainly for landscape / nature photography. The gear is (relatively) light compared to a Nikon D300 with a 17-55 nikkor lens. Stroling through nature is much more pleasant when you're not carrying large / heavy bags.

Sure, the Leica offers no zoom, but that means being more creative with the (fixed) focal lengths you've got in your bag (or use the foot-zoom).

Link to post
Share on other sites

Lately, I use my M9 mainly for landscape / nature photography. The gear is (relatively) light compared to a Nikon D300 with a 17-55 nikkor lens. Stroling through nature is much more pleasant when you're not carrying large / heavy bags.

Sure, the Leica offers no zoom, but that means being more creative with the (fixed) focal lengths you've got in your bag (or use the foot-zoom).

 

Indeed, I never think twice about bringing the M9 when I'm hiking or whatever, it doesn't weigh all that much and doesn't take up that much space. Alot of times if I was just going on a short hike (before my M9) I would just not bring my SLR because i didn't want the extra weight on my back or around my shoulder/arm (camelbak backpack as my water source, which also has room for other things), and I would hardly ever bring my large format on a long hike. But now I always just pop the M9 with 28mm and sometimes a 50mm in the bag and head out.

 

All of my lenses in my SLR and large format kits are primes anyway, so the lack of zoom isn't really a determining factor for me.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Lately, I use my M9 mainly for landscape / nature photography. The gear is (relatively) light compared to a Nikon D300 with a 17-55 nikkor lens. Stroling through nature is much more pleasant when you're not carrying large / heavy bags.

Sure, the Leica offers no zoom, but that means being more creative with the (fixed) focal lengths you've got in your bag (or use the foot-zoom).

 

Compact and light is certainly helpful. I use a 28-35-50 MATE on my M9, an excellent combination for landscapes and cities, particularly in daylight where the F4 maximum is not an issue and some DOF is usually desirable.

 

Regards ... Harold

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...