batmobile Posted September 19, 2012 Share #261 Posted September 19, 2012 Advertisement (gone after registration) I personally think all this guff about 'the lenses having the magic' is, well, guff. 99% of the time, when a photo is on the wall, you cannot tell whether it was shot with a Leica using a Leica, Zeiss or CV lens. Leica offers some exotic lenses and they do perform better wide open in most cases, but as for picking them off the wall... and nobody can possibly claim that the 'magic' in a 35 3.5 summaron and 28 Elmarit asph is the same thing!!!! Leica M, to me, is about form factor and handling. That allows me to capture shots I would otherwise miss. Sometimes I use a 24 lux asph and in known good light, I use a CV 25 P. The prints look pretty well the same, but the CV does not do f1.4! ... but you need a good clear optical viewfinder, wonderful shutter release and other qualities to be able to make the M the tool that it is for me. IMHO the Leica M may prove a great development, especially if the high ISO performance is such that it is a dawn to dark camera in the way the M9 fails. 24 MP is enough to eclipse the M9's CCD on resolution. After all, the D3X did quite clearly according to Puts. And lets not fanny about with 'nuances of CCDs' and their 'feel' because absolutely jaw dropping images have been produced by CMOS sensors for a very long time. What matters most of all, is being able to get - the - shot. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted September 19, 2012 Posted September 19, 2012 Hi batmobile, Take a look here Leica M and M-E. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
sharookh Posted September 19, 2012 Share #262 Posted September 19, 2012 Leica is a supreme camera manufacturer, but it also needs to stay in business! Frankly, IMHO, the M is a positive way forward allowing Leica to expand its user base which at present is restricted to a few. A larger user base means more revenue, and more revenue (if planned well) means more funds for further R and D - which can only be good for the company and good for us all. I would have been worried if it compromised it's quality or went back in time (not necessarily a bad thing). But here, Leica has managed to be more aggressive and more pro-active. By introducing a higher mp count, Live View, EVF compatibility, video (I admit - a bit strange at first thought), and the focus assist feature, it has tried to retain a lot of customers who - like me, use parallel systems for certain features which Leica does not possess. With this introduction, I'm sure we will be seeing more new users on this forum! The important thing as I see it is that the M rangefinder identity has been retained, without compromise. The layout appears well designed and the screen at last is at least on par with other premium offerings. Is it going to improve my photography? Well, its going to give me more options. Will it give me better pictures? That's for me to make! Frankly, I love the new M, I love my M9s and I love the thought of owning the Monochrome!! So many choices - so much money........! Thank you Solms - for doing a great job! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
philipus Posted September 19, 2012 Share #263 Posted September 19, 2012 if so, with release of ME just about 2 months after, would be huge disservice to early adopters. like price cuts on first iphone tha burned initial buyers. That's one of several risks one takes as an early adopter. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
colonel Posted September 19, 2012 Share #264 Posted September 19, 2012 99% of the time, when a photo is on the wall, you cannot tell whether it was shot with a Leica using a Leica, Zeiss or CV lens. Leica M, to me, is about form factor and handling. That allows me to capture shots I would otherwise miss. IMHO the Leica M may prove a great development, especially if the high ISO performance is such that it is a dawn to dark camera in the way the M9 fails. What matters most of all, is being able to get - the - shot. 1. I can tell between Leica and Canikon most of the time and Zeiss surprisingly have quite a strong character. There is a law of diminishing returns with lenses. The Leica 35mm f1.4 is 2.5x the price of the Nikon 35m f1.4. Is it 2.5x the quality ?, no, the Niokn 35mm f1.4G produces beautiful pictures, except below f2.8 where the Leica walks all over it. 2. Yes. No one else produces such a small FF camera. But the Leica M process is very appealing to me. 3. I would like more ISO performance, but its rare that I need to go over f1.4 and ISO 640. Even 1250 (and sometimes 2500) on the M9 can be quite acceptable if exposed correctly. I never go over 1600 on the D800E, as despite the hype, 1600 already has grain and 3200 is for emergencies only. Even on the x-pro1, 3200 is only for emergencies - not the absolute in quality, more reportage 4. Yes, get the shot Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Freeman Photography Posted September 19, 2012 Share #265 Posted September 19, 2012 Only having had my M9P for 2 months now and having read all the hype about the new M10 / M before and after the announcement this week, I find it bemusing that people on a Leica forum are already slagging off the camera's before even picking them up. I myself love my new Leica M9P, even though I own 2 Canon 1d Mk4 \1d Mk3 and a 5d Mk1 along with several L Series lenses...apart from using the Canon stuff for work, I havent taken the Canon stuff out at all and the image quality from my M9P blows away antything taken on my 1D4 even with 50mm 1.2 Lens... Technology can be a bad thing sometimes and keeping up with the 'Jones's' is not always the best..the M9P might be the best camera Leica make until the M11\12 comes out, just look at Apple with their OSX Lion and then Mountain Lion and also the Iphone 4 to 5... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jamriman Posted September 19, 2012 Share #266 Posted September 19, 2012 Only having had my M9P for 2 months now and having read all the hype about the new M10 / M before and after the announcement this week, I find it bemusing that people on a Leica forum are already slagging off the camera's before even picking them up. I myself love my new Leica M9P, even though I own 2 Canon 1d Mk4 \1d Mk3 and a 5d Mk1 along with several L Series lenses...apart from using the Canon stuff for work, I havent taken the Canon stuff out at all and the image quality from my M9P blows away antything taken on my 1D4 even with 50mm 1.2 Lens... Technology can be a bad thing sometimes and keeping up with the 'Jones's' is not always the best..the M9P might be the best camera Leica make until the M11\12 comes out, just look at Apple with their OSX Lion and then Mountain Lion and also the Iphone 4 to 5... I don't see the correlation between Leica and Apple and am not sure why you think the M11/12 might be better than the M9P but not the M10. I don't understand what you mean. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
almoore Posted September 19, 2012 Share #267 Posted September 19, 2012 Advertisement (gone after registration) the image quality from my M9P blows away antything taken on my 1D4 even with 50mm 1.2 Lens... I never really understand this notion that any particular camera "blows away" another. Most cameras have their strengths and weaknesses, and most of them are capable of producing very high image quality. How you process the image has much more bearing on the final "look" than the brand of camera, a tendency that's as true with digital as it was with film. In any case, the particular Canon lens you mention, the 50 f1.2, is a useful lens, but not only is not as sharp as any of the Leica 50s it's not even as sharp as the other, much cheaper, Canon 50s. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Freeman Photography Posted September 19, 2012 Share #268 Posted September 19, 2012 I never really understand this notion that any particular camera "blows away" another. Most cameras have their strengths and weaknesses, and most of them are capable of producing very high image quality. How you process the image has much more bearing on the final "look" than the brand of camera, a tendency that's as true with digital as it was with film. In any case, the particular Canon lens you mention, the 50 f1.2, is a useful lens, but not only is not as sharp as any of the Leica 50s it's not even as sharp as the other, much cheaper, Canon 50s. What I mean is , the Canon's are good for some things that the M9P aren't , such as fast moving sport, wildlife, low light etc, and having revisited places that I have taken similar shots with 1D4\Canon 50 1.2, the M9P\Summilux 1.4 is far sharper. Like all Leica users on this forum, its our choice to buy whatever camera's we like, whether it be 'status', 'ZEN' or just plain 'money to throw away'...in my case I sold a Canon 400mm Sports Lens to fund my M9P and have no regrets buying the M9P Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rramesh Posted September 20, 2012 Share #269 Posted September 20, 2012 After going through all the posts and threads on the M-E and M, I am still unable to comprehend one thing. What can I visually discern or differentiate better in a picture taken from an M with that taken from an M9 or M9-P. Somehow Leica has failed to answer that this Photokina. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted September 20, 2012 Share #270 Posted September 20, 2012 Less color shift issues due to the special microlenses of the new sensor most probably. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted September 20, 2012 Share #271 Posted September 20, 2012 And better acuity through less crosstalk between the pixels I guess. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gerard Posted September 20, 2012 Share #272 Posted September 20, 2012 Being happy to use flash when the light levels are below what I need, and not really wanting LV; I'd purchase the M-E(nthusiast) to sit alongside my M9-p (rather than the M)... but... not with that chrome metalwork. Any chance they would replace with black controls and hot shoe as a special order? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rramesh Posted September 20, 2012 Share #273 Posted September 20, 2012 What I understood as benefits CMOS brings over CCD is reduced vertical streaking and a price advantage in manufacturing. I don't see the latter benefit as significant as Leica is not using an off the shelf sensor, rather a custom engineered one. Without volumes or cross licensing, there will be no real cost savings. On the other had CMOS has issues as well, mainly image quality. Of course, the real commercial motivation would be live view but I always thought Leica was about image quality. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rramesh Posted September 20, 2012 Share #274 Posted September 20, 2012 Being happy to use flash when the light levels are below what I need, and not really wanting LV; I'd purchase the M-E(nthusiast) to sit alongside my M9-p (rather than the M)... but... not with that chrome metalwork. Any chance they would replace with black controls and hot shoe as a special order? I think the rationale for that is Leica may offer customization on top and bottom plates, like the X2. Having too many choices in buttons and wheels is difficult to manage. After all celebrities like customization. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hosermage Posted September 20, 2012 Share #275 Posted September 20, 2012 What can I visually discern or differentiate better in a picture taken from an M with that taken from an M9 or M9-P. Hopefully, nothing. People love the images from the M9, so it will be a win for Leica if they're able to replicate the same image quality with the new CMOS sensor and Maestro engine. I'm not wishing for better, just not worse. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
philipus Posted September 20, 2012 Share #276 Posted September 20, 2012 What I understood as benefits CMOS brings over CCD is reduced vertical streaking and a price advantage in manufacturing. I don't see the latter benefit as significant as Leica is not using an off the shelf sensor, rather a custom engineered one. Without volumes or cross licensing, there will be no real cost savings. On the other had CMOS has issues as well, mainly image quality. Of course, the real commercial motivation would be live view but I always thought Leica was about image quality. Shocker, cost savings in manufacturing? Surely that's an expression that hasn't been heard within Leica HQ walls since the M2 was designed. But, seriously, it seems it would be more correct to say that because Leica uses a non-off the shelf sensor cost savings could be a welcome addition to the equation. After all, Leica needs to be profitable. The unexpectedly low price of the M should suggest that Leica nevertheless manages to maintain a margin. The image quality will be the determining factor, ultimately. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
leafster Posted September 20, 2012 Share #277 Posted September 20, 2012 Should M9 or M9-P sensor failed/damaged, will it be replaced by the new sensor? Anyone pls.. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andybarton Posted September 20, 2012 Share #278 Posted September 20, 2012 Should M9 or M9-P sensor failed/damaged, will it be replaced by the new sensor? Anyone pls.. No. It won't. All the insides of the camera are different. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
previlo Posted September 20, 2012 Share #279 Posted September 20, 2012 No. It won't. All the insides of the camera are different. Well it depends what sensor he is referring? :-) In other words, yes if the M9/M9P sensor fails, it will b ereplaced with a M-E sensor Which should be the same, at least that is what everyone so far says...or is there a small (but very unlikely) chance that the M-E does have a similar, but still different sensor than the M9/M9P??? Damn, why is I-Fix-It or any other tech website, not opening and inspecting a M-E, like they do will all the Apple products??? :D:D Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jamriman Posted September 20, 2012 Share #280 Posted September 20, 2012 I still think the RD-1 is the truest digital M to date. Too bad we never saw an RD-2. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.